[Daily Trust] The Executive Secretary, National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), Professor Yusuf Usman, in this interview denied allegations of illegal recruitments and accused Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) of 'feeding fat' from contributions of enrollees without rendering commensurate services.
Reported by allAfrica.com 18 hours ago.
Nigeria: I Have Not Recruited Anybody Into NHIS - Prof. Usman
↧
↧
Vaccination funding may be cut if Obamacare ends, public health experts warn
Many worry that up to 1 million Illinois consumers could lose their health insurance if Obamacare is repealed.
But Chicago Department of Public Health leaders aren't just worried about that part of the Affordable Care Act being repealed. They're also concerned about the possible loss of funds used... Reported by ChicagoTribune 12 hours ago.
But Chicago Department of Public Health leaders aren't just worried about that part of the Affordable Care Act being repealed. They're also concerned about the possible loss of funds used... Reported by ChicagoTribune 12 hours ago.
↧
One-in-four plan to drop health insurance
Nearly a quarter of Australians are set to dump their private health cover while one third are considering switching insurers, a survey has found.
Reported by SBS 4 hours ago.
↧
Trump's Advisers Want You To Believe He's The Most Productive President Yet. He Isn't.
President Donald Trump’s advisers have taken to boasting about the flurry of activity that has come out of the White House in the last few weeks. And on Sunday’s political television shows, Stephen Miller, a senior White House policy adviser, made the most audacious version of this claim yet.
According to Miller, Trump has already accomplished more than most presidents achieve over the course of four or even eight years ― even though he has been in office for just three weeks.
Miller: "We have a president who has done more in three weeks than most presidents have done in an entire administration." #ThisWeek pic.twitter.com/btkwdztfQ0
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) February 12, 2017
Although statements like this sound like boilerplate, they are actually among the most politically important arguments Trump administration officials are making right now.
Even some of Trump’s supporters have criticized the president for telling blatant falsehoods, alienating longtime international allies, and introducing clumsily made policies that have invited judicial scrutiny. They are lot more likely to forgive him if, despite all the controversy, he’s taking concrete steps to realize his central campaign promises.
But although Trump has spent a lot of time holding meetings and signing pieces of paper in front of television cameras, the changes to federal policy have been less consequential than the images suggest.
In fact, Trump has actually accomplished relatively little compared to his immediate predecessor, former President Barack Obama.
What Trump Has Done So Far
Trump has signed some genuinely significant executive orders ― starting with one that reinstated the “Mexico City rule,” which prohibits U.S. funding for global health organizations that provide information about abortion as part of their family planning counseling.
Trump has also officially restarted the controversial Keystone and Dakota Access pipeline projects, while formally pulling the U.S. out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. And he has issued a new requirement that the federal government eliminate two regulations for each new one.
But the order turns out to be full of ambiguity, so the scope of its impact remains unclear. Meanwhile, many of the executive actions that the White House has touted these past few weeks are really promises for future action.
A case in point is an order to relax enforcement of the Affordable Care Act’s penalties was similarly lacking in detail. It sent an important signal, for sure, and may have destabilized insurance markets by making carriers uncertain about the future. But, so far, federal policy hasn’t really changed.
Trump’s most consequential executive action so far was probably the attempt to block visitors from seven majority-Muslim countries ― and the courts have blocked that, in no small part because the crafting of the order was so ham-handed.
What Obama Did In His First Few Weeks
Obama was also busy in his first few weeks; like Trump, he signed executive orders all along the spectrum from concrete to symbolic. The best examples of the former were probably his orders ending torture, rescinding the Mexico City rule that Trump just reinstated, and tightening ethical standards for executive branch officials (although, over time, the administration took advantage of loopholes to dilute its effect).
But Obama didn’t just sign executive orders in his first weeks. He also signed significant pieces of legislation.
Here were the three most memorable:
*The Lily Ledbetter Act:* The first bill Obama signed struck a blow against gender discrimination. It was the legislative response to a 2007 Supreme Court decision that had severely limited the statute of limitations for women who wanted to sue employers for paying them less than similarly qualified men. The law, named for the woman responsible for the Supreme Court case, effectively extended the statute of limitations ― making it possible for many more women to avail themselves of the legal system when employers were treating them unfairly.
*The Children’s Health Insurance Program:* Obama and his allies knew that comprehensive health care reform would take months to put together, so they acted immediately to reauthorize the Children’s Health Insurance Program, a Bill Clinton-era program that had provided coverage to literally millions of low-income kids. The 2009 law both reauthorized and substantially expanded the program, and financed that expansion with an increase in the tobacco tax ― which reduced smoking and almost certainly saved thousands (or maybe tens of thousands) of lives.
*The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act:* The immediate purpose of the Recovery Act was to turn around the economy, which was shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month when Obama took office. It sought to do so through a combination of public works, tax breaks and assistance to state and local government that, together, added up to more than a $700 billion investment. The long-term goal was to make the economy more efficient and productive long after Obama would be gone, with investments in projects like alternative energy.
Why Trump Can’t Move As Quickly
Obama signed the Recovery Act on his fourth week of office. Trump just finished his third, so, in theory, the new president still has a few days to sign something of similar consequence. In reality, that’s not going to happen.
There are supposedly three big pieces of legislation at the top of Trump’s domestic agenda: an infrastructure program, tax reform and repeal of the Affordable Care Act. All three are still in the conceptual stage, with GOP leaders arguing about the basic shape legislation should take. Trump suggested just last week that repealing and replacing Obamacare, which he once promised would happen within the first few weeks of his taking office, might not be done until next year.
Trump shares responsibility for his agenda with Congress, just as Obama did ― so a lack of comparative legislative progress says as much the Republicans who work on Capitol Hill as it does about the one spending workweeks at the White House.
But it’s also true that Obama hit the ground running because he used his campaign to sketch out a detailed policy agenda; because he staffed his administration with veteran operatives who knew how to run the government; and because he used the transition period between Election Day and Inauguration Day to coordinate with Congress on proposals they could enact quickly. Trump didn’t do these things, at least not to the same scale.
Of course, Obama’s first few weeks were unusually busy by historical standards. And Trump has plenty of presidential term left. But he’s done less than his aides keep suggesting.
And the notion that Miller put out there on Sunday ― that Trump has already accomplished more than most of his predecessors did by the end of their tenures ― is just laughable.
Want more updates on policy & politics from Jonathan Cohn? Sign up for his newsletter, Citizen Cohn, here.
How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking
updates on Trump’s presidency by messaging us
here.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 hour ago.
According to Miller, Trump has already accomplished more than most presidents achieve over the course of four or even eight years ― even though he has been in office for just three weeks.
Miller: "We have a president who has done more in three weeks than most presidents have done in an entire administration." #ThisWeek pic.twitter.com/btkwdztfQ0
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) February 12, 2017
Although statements like this sound like boilerplate, they are actually among the most politically important arguments Trump administration officials are making right now.
Even some of Trump’s supporters have criticized the president for telling blatant falsehoods, alienating longtime international allies, and introducing clumsily made policies that have invited judicial scrutiny. They are lot more likely to forgive him if, despite all the controversy, he’s taking concrete steps to realize his central campaign promises.
But although Trump has spent a lot of time holding meetings and signing pieces of paper in front of television cameras, the changes to federal policy have been less consequential than the images suggest.
In fact, Trump has actually accomplished relatively little compared to his immediate predecessor, former President Barack Obama.
What Trump Has Done So Far
Trump has signed some genuinely significant executive orders ― starting with one that reinstated the “Mexico City rule,” which prohibits U.S. funding for global health organizations that provide information about abortion as part of their family planning counseling.
Trump has also officially restarted the controversial Keystone and Dakota Access pipeline projects, while formally pulling the U.S. out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. And he has issued a new requirement that the federal government eliminate two regulations for each new one.
But the order turns out to be full of ambiguity, so the scope of its impact remains unclear. Meanwhile, many of the executive actions that the White House has touted these past few weeks are really promises for future action.
A case in point is an order to relax enforcement of the Affordable Care Act’s penalties was similarly lacking in detail. It sent an important signal, for sure, and may have destabilized insurance markets by making carriers uncertain about the future. But, so far, federal policy hasn’t really changed.
Trump’s most consequential executive action so far was probably the attempt to block visitors from seven majority-Muslim countries ― and the courts have blocked that, in no small part because the crafting of the order was so ham-handed.
What Obama Did In His First Few Weeks
Obama was also busy in his first few weeks; like Trump, he signed executive orders all along the spectrum from concrete to symbolic. The best examples of the former were probably his orders ending torture, rescinding the Mexico City rule that Trump just reinstated, and tightening ethical standards for executive branch officials (although, over time, the administration took advantage of loopholes to dilute its effect).
But Obama didn’t just sign executive orders in his first weeks. He also signed significant pieces of legislation.
Here were the three most memorable:
*The Lily Ledbetter Act:* The first bill Obama signed struck a blow against gender discrimination. It was the legislative response to a 2007 Supreme Court decision that had severely limited the statute of limitations for women who wanted to sue employers for paying them less than similarly qualified men. The law, named for the woman responsible for the Supreme Court case, effectively extended the statute of limitations ― making it possible for many more women to avail themselves of the legal system when employers were treating them unfairly.
*The Children’s Health Insurance Program:* Obama and his allies knew that comprehensive health care reform would take months to put together, so they acted immediately to reauthorize the Children’s Health Insurance Program, a Bill Clinton-era program that had provided coverage to literally millions of low-income kids. The 2009 law both reauthorized and substantially expanded the program, and financed that expansion with an increase in the tobacco tax ― which reduced smoking and almost certainly saved thousands (or maybe tens of thousands) of lives.
*The American Recovery And Reinvestment Act:* The immediate purpose of the Recovery Act was to turn around the economy, which was shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs every month when Obama took office. It sought to do so through a combination of public works, tax breaks and assistance to state and local government that, together, added up to more than a $700 billion investment. The long-term goal was to make the economy more efficient and productive long after Obama would be gone, with investments in projects like alternative energy.
Why Trump Can’t Move As Quickly
Obama signed the Recovery Act on his fourth week of office. Trump just finished his third, so, in theory, the new president still has a few days to sign something of similar consequence. In reality, that’s not going to happen.
There are supposedly three big pieces of legislation at the top of Trump’s domestic agenda: an infrastructure program, tax reform and repeal of the Affordable Care Act. All three are still in the conceptual stage, with GOP leaders arguing about the basic shape legislation should take. Trump suggested just last week that repealing and replacing Obamacare, which he once promised would happen within the first few weeks of his taking office, might not be done until next year.
Trump shares responsibility for his agenda with Congress, just as Obama did ― so a lack of comparative legislative progress says as much the Republicans who work on Capitol Hill as it does about the one spending workweeks at the White House.
But it’s also true that Obama hit the ground running because he used his campaign to sketch out a detailed policy agenda; because he staffed his administration with veteran operatives who knew how to run the government; and because he used the transition period between Election Day and Inauguration Day to coordinate with Congress on proposals they could enact quickly. Trump didn’t do these things, at least not to the same scale.
Of course, Obama’s first few weeks were unusually busy by historical standards. And Trump has plenty of presidential term left. But he’s done less than his aides keep suggesting.
And the notion that Miller put out there on Sunday ― that Trump has already accomplished more than most of his predecessors did by the end of their tenures ― is just laughable.
Want more updates on policy & politics from Jonathan Cohn? Sign up for his newsletter, Citizen Cohn, here.
How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you?
Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get breaking
updates on Trump’s presidency by messaging us
here.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 hour ago.
↧
Sanders: Tea Party Was Funded By Kochs; Progressive 'Uprising' Driven By Passion
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) bridled at a suggestion that people protesting against the Trump administration are similar to the Tea Party demonstrators.
“It’s not a Tea Party because the Tea Party was essentially funded by the billionaire Koch brothers,” Sanders said during an interview Sunday on “Meet the Press.” “This is a spontaneous and grass-roots uprising of the American people.”
And he said protesters aren’t going away anytime soon. Sanders said demonstrations would continue to grow, particularly over the issues of the threatened repeal of the Afforadable Care Act in national rallies Feb. 25.
“I think you’re going to see people in conservative areas, in progressive areas, asking the Republicans: ‘What are you going to do when you throw 23 million people off of health insurance?’” Sanders said.
“’’How many of them are going to die? Are you really going to repeal the protection against preexisting conditions so that people who have cancer or heart disease will no longer be able to have health insurance? You going to throw kids off of their parents’ health insurance programs?’”
Some observers have noted that recent protests have seemed to mimic the Tea Party demonstrations beginning in 2009, though the numbers now are massively larger. But others say the Tea Party tactics to turn street protests into political power borrowed from the left and its far earlier protests against the Vietnam War.
In his “Meet the Press” appearance, Sanders also blasted Donald Trump’s vow to “drain the swamp” of corrupt old cronies in Washington.
“Well, guess who’s running the swamp right now?” he asked. “The same exact Wall Street guys from Goldman Sachs who were there in the past. “type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Coverage + articlesList=5852fbbce4b06ae7ec2a3cb7
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 19 hours ago.
“It’s not a Tea Party because the Tea Party was essentially funded by the billionaire Koch brothers,” Sanders said during an interview Sunday on “Meet the Press.” “This is a spontaneous and grass-roots uprising of the American people.”
And he said protesters aren’t going away anytime soon. Sanders said demonstrations would continue to grow, particularly over the issues of the threatened repeal of the Afforadable Care Act in national rallies Feb. 25.
“I think you’re going to see people in conservative areas, in progressive areas, asking the Republicans: ‘What are you going to do when you throw 23 million people off of health insurance?’” Sanders said.
“’’How many of them are going to die? Are you really going to repeal the protection against preexisting conditions so that people who have cancer or heart disease will no longer be able to have health insurance? You going to throw kids off of their parents’ health insurance programs?’”
Some observers have noted that recent protests have seemed to mimic the Tea Party demonstrations beginning in 2009, though the numbers now are massively larger. But others say the Tea Party tactics to turn street protests into political power borrowed from the left and its far earlier protests against the Vietnam War.
In his “Meet the Press” appearance, Sanders also blasted Donald Trump’s vow to “drain the swamp” of corrupt old cronies in Washington.
“Well, guess who’s running the swamp right now?” he asked. “The same exact Wall Street guys from Goldman Sachs who were there in the past. “type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related Coverage + articlesList=5852fbbce4b06ae7ec2a3cb7
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 19 hours ago.
↧
↧
South Florida-based Lice Removal Company, Lice Troopers, Opens Second Orlando Location
Second Lice Troopers treatment center opens in Orlando, Florida
(PRWEB) February 13, 2017
Lice Troopers is excited to announce its second lice treatment center in Orlando. The all-natural lice removal company based in South Florida first expanded to central Florida last month with the opening of its first treatment center dedicated to serving Orlando-area families. The company has already experienced success in its first Orlando center.
The rapidly growing company is now up to eight treatment centers, with four in South Florida and two New York. “We love what we do and our goal is to continue to grow until there’s a Lice Troopers treatment center to serve every community,” says Arie Harel, CEO of Lice Troopers.
Lice Troopers offers lice screenings and removal services by their team of professionals in their state-of-the-art treatment centers as well as in-home treatments. The new Orlando treatment center, located at 6645 Vineland Rd., Suite 250, Orlando, FL 32819, will offer the same services to families in Orlando and surrounding areas.
For more information, visit http://www.licetroopers.com or call 800.403.5423.
Lice Troopers is the all-natural, guaranteed head lice removal service that manually treats and removes head lice safely and discreetly in child-friendly treatment centers, or other chosen location. Providing safe solutions for frantic families, the Lice Troopers team has successfully treated thousands of families with pediatrician-recommended services that may be reimbursed by many major health insurance carriers, flexible spending accounts and health savings accounts. Reported by PRWeb 18 hours ago.
(PRWEB) February 13, 2017
Lice Troopers is excited to announce its second lice treatment center in Orlando. The all-natural lice removal company based in South Florida first expanded to central Florida last month with the opening of its first treatment center dedicated to serving Orlando-area families. The company has already experienced success in its first Orlando center.
The rapidly growing company is now up to eight treatment centers, with four in South Florida and two New York. “We love what we do and our goal is to continue to grow until there’s a Lice Troopers treatment center to serve every community,” says Arie Harel, CEO of Lice Troopers.
Lice Troopers offers lice screenings and removal services by their team of professionals in their state-of-the-art treatment centers as well as in-home treatments. The new Orlando treatment center, located at 6645 Vineland Rd., Suite 250, Orlando, FL 32819, will offer the same services to families in Orlando and surrounding areas.
For more information, visit http://www.licetroopers.com or call 800.403.5423.
Lice Troopers is the all-natural, guaranteed head lice removal service that manually treats and removes head lice safely and discreetly in child-friendly treatment centers, or other chosen location. Providing safe solutions for frantic families, the Lice Troopers team has successfully treated thousands of families with pediatrician-recommended services that may be reimbursed by many major health insurance carriers, flexible spending accounts and health savings accounts. Reported by PRWeb 18 hours ago.
↧
Quebec family of 4 with baby on the way shocked after government revokes health insurance
Without warning, a Quebec family says all their medicare cards were cancelled. Worse, they may have to reimburse the provincial health insurance board tens of thousands of dollars because the board doesn't believe the family lives in Quebec.
Reported by CBC.ca 11 hours ago.
↧
Max India Registers Strong Growth in the Quarter Ended December 2016
*Business Wire India**Q3 FY2017 Results Highlights: *
· Max Healthcare Network of Hospitals Gross Revenues: Rs. 639 Cr., grew 16%
· Max Healthcare Network of Hospitals EBITDA: Rs. 63 Cr., grew 17%
· Max Bupa Gross Written Premium: Rs. 140 Cr., grew 24%
*Max India Ltd. (Max India)*, Max Group’s listed company in the Health and Allied Services sector, today announced its financial results for the third quarter of FY2017 (Q3 FY2017).
*Max Healthcare (MHC)*, Max India’s flagship operating company, reported Gross Revenues of Rs. 639 Cr. in Q3 FY2017 for its network of owned and managed hospitals, growing 16% over the corresponding period last year. MHC, which is an equal joint venture with South Africa-based Life Healthcare, reported a 17% growth in network EBITDA to Rs. 63 Cr. for the same period.
The growth in profitability was driven primarily by improvement in margins from the company’s newer hospitals in Shalimar Bagh (Delhi), Dehradun, Bathinda and Mohali. In the first 9 months of FY2017 (9M FY2017), MHC’s Gross Revenues grew 23% to Rs. 1,939 Cr., while EBITDA grew 34% to Rs. 203 Cr. over the corresponding period last year. During 9M FY2017, a significant proportion of revenue contributions came from MHC’s major tower specialities, with Renal Sciences leading revenue growth at 36%.
*Max Bupa Health Insurance (Max Bupa)*, one of India’s leading standalone private health insurers, also reported significant growth in its topline with Gross Written Premium (GWP) of Rs. 140 Cr. in Q3 FY2017, growing 24% over last year and 23% for the first 9 months of 2017 over last year. The business now covers 1.2 million urban retail customers.
One of the fastest growing players in the segment, Max Bupa is now the country’s 8^th largest private health insurer overall and 4^th largest amongst standalone private health insurers in India. Max Bupa was awarded “India’s Most Valuable and Admired Health Insurer 2016” by Pharma Leaders, an annual recognition to honour excellence in the healthcare sector.
*Antara** Senior Living (Antara)*, the third operating company under Max India, is pioneering the concept of ‘Age in Place’ for the elderly by developing Senior Living communities in India. Antara will launch its maiden community with 200 apartments in Q4 FY2017 near Dehradun, Uttarakhand.
Commenting on Max India’s performance, *Mr. Rahul Khosla, Chairman, Max India *said, “Our key healthcare specialities, including Neurosciences, Oncology, Orthopaedics and Renal Sciences have contributed to strong growth this year. In addition, MHC’s new business initiatives, such as Oncology Day Care, Digicare and Max Labs, have also started showing encouraging results. There will be significant effort over the next few months in scaling up and stabilising growth across these new service lines. I am pleased with Max Bupa’s performance and strong position in the market and am looking forward to welcoming Antara’s first residents this year.”
*Mr. Mohit Talwar*, *Managing Director, Max India*, added, “With over 20% growth in revenues so far this year, Max Healthcare continues to outpace its key competitors. Max Bupa has also seen a growth of 24% in its B2C segment this year, and is the 5^th largest private health insurer in this segment. The market has taken cognisance of this and has responded extremely favourably since the Max India stock started trading in July.”
In January 2016, the Max Group concluded an important corporate restructuring wherein the erstwhile Max India was demerged into three separate entities, Max Financial Services, Max India and Max Ventures & Industries. With the listing of the Max India stock in July 2016, all three demerged companies of the Max Group are now listed.
*About Max Group*
The Max Group is a leading Indian multi-business conglomerate with a commanding presence in the Life Insurance, Health & Allied businesses and packaging sectors. In FY 2016, the Group recorded consolidated revenues of Rs 14,237 Cr. It has a total customer base of 9 million, nearly 240 offices spread across India and people strength of 22,500 as on 31^st March 2016. The Group’s investor base includes marquee global financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs, KKR, IFC Washington, Fidelity, Wasatch, Ward Ferry, Nomura, New York Life and Invesco.
The Max Group comprises three listed companies, namely Max Financial Services, Max India and Max Ventures & Industries.
*About Max India Limited*
Max India, the holding company for Max Healthcare, Max Bupa Health Insurance and Antara Senior Living, is focused on health and allied businesses. Max Healthcare and Max Bupa Health Insurance are joint ventures with global leaders Life Healthcare (South Africa) and Bupa Finance Plc. (UK), respectively. These businesses have well-entrenched positions in their respective categories, and are recognized for their outstanding service standards. The Company owns and actively manages a 45.95% per cent stake in Max Healthcare, a 51% stake in Max Bupa Health Insurance and a 100% stake in Antara Senior Living.
Max India is listed on both the Bombay Stock Exchange as well as the National Stock Exchange.
*For further information, please visit:*
Max Group: www.maxgroup.net
Max India: www.maxindia.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/themaxgroup
Twitter: https://twitter.com/maxgroup
Reported by Business Wire India 13 hours ago.
· Max Healthcare Network of Hospitals Gross Revenues: Rs. 639 Cr., grew 16%
· Max Healthcare Network of Hospitals EBITDA: Rs. 63 Cr., grew 17%
· Max Bupa Gross Written Premium: Rs. 140 Cr., grew 24%
*Max India Ltd. (Max India)*, Max Group’s listed company in the Health and Allied Services sector, today announced its financial results for the third quarter of FY2017 (Q3 FY2017).
*Max Healthcare (MHC)*, Max India’s flagship operating company, reported Gross Revenues of Rs. 639 Cr. in Q3 FY2017 for its network of owned and managed hospitals, growing 16% over the corresponding period last year. MHC, which is an equal joint venture with South Africa-based Life Healthcare, reported a 17% growth in network EBITDA to Rs. 63 Cr. for the same period.
The growth in profitability was driven primarily by improvement in margins from the company’s newer hospitals in Shalimar Bagh (Delhi), Dehradun, Bathinda and Mohali. In the first 9 months of FY2017 (9M FY2017), MHC’s Gross Revenues grew 23% to Rs. 1,939 Cr., while EBITDA grew 34% to Rs. 203 Cr. over the corresponding period last year. During 9M FY2017, a significant proportion of revenue contributions came from MHC’s major tower specialities, with Renal Sciences leading revenue growth at 36%.
*Max Bupa Health Insurance (Max Bupa)*, one of India’s leading standalone private health insurers, also reported significant growth in its topline with Gross Written Premium (GWP) of Rs. 140 Cr. in Q3 FY2017, growing 24% over last year and 23% for the first 9 months of 2017 over last year. The business now covers 1.2 million urban retail customers.
One of the fastest growing players in the segment, Max Bupa is now the country’s 8^th largest private health insurer overall and 4^th largest amongst standalone private health insurers in India. Max Bupa was awarded “India’s Most Valuable and Admired Health Insurer 2016” by Pharma Leaders, an annual recognition to honour excellence in the healthcare sector.
*Antara** Senior Living (Antara)*, the third operating company under Max India, is pioneering the concept of ‘Age in Place’ for the elderly by developing Senior Living communities in India. Antara will launch its maiden community with 200 apartments in Q4 FY2017 near Dehradun, Uttarakhand.
Commenting on Max India’s performance, *Mr. Rahul Khosla, Chairman, Max India *said, “Our key healthcare specialities, including Neurosciences, Oncology, Orthopaedics and Renal Sciences have contributed to strong growth this year. In addition, MHC’s new business initiatives, such as Oncology Day Care, Digicare and Max Labs, have also started showing encouraging results. There will be significant effort over the next few months in scaling up and stabilising growth across these new service lines. I am pleased with Max Bupa’s performance and strong position in the market and am looking forward to welcoming Antara’s first residents this year.”
*Mr. Mohit Talwar*, *Managing Director, Max India*, added, “With over 20% growth in revenues so far this year, Max Healthcare continues to outpace its key competitors. Max Bupa has also seen a growth of 24% in its B2C segment this year, and is the 5^th largest private health insurer in this segment. The market has taken cognisance of this and has responded extremely favourably since the Max India stock started trading in July.”
In January 2016, the Max Group concluded an important corporate restructuring wherein the erstwhile Max India was demerged into three separate entities, Max Financial Services, Max India and Max Ventures & Industries. With the listing of the Max India stock in July 2016, all three demerged companies of the Max Group are now listed.
*About Max Group*
The Max Group is a leading Indian multi-business conglomerate with a commanding presence in the Life Insurance, Health & Allied businesses and packaging sectors. In FY 2016, the Group recorded consolidated revenues of Rs 14,237 Cr. It has a total customer base of 9 million, nearly 240 offices spread across India and people strength of 22,500 as on 31^st March 2016. The Group’s investor base includes marquee global financial institutions such as Goldman Sachs, KKR, IFC Washington, Fidelity, Wasatch, Ward Ferry, Nomura, New York Life and Invesco.
The Max Group comprises three listed companies, namely Max Financial Services, Max India and Max Ventures & Industries.
*About Max India Limited*
Max India, the holding company for Max Healthcare, Max Bupa Health Insurance and Antara Senior Living, is focused on health and allied businesses. Max Healthcare and Max Bupa Health Insurance are joint ventures with global leaders Life Healthcare (South Africa) and Bupa Finance Plc. (UK), respectively. These businesses have well-entrenched positions in their respective categories, and are recognized for their outstanding service standards. The Company owns and actively manages a 45.95% per cent stake in Max Healthcare, a 51% stake in Max Bupa Health Insurance and a 100% stake in Antara Senior Living.
Max India is listed on both the Bombay Stock Exchange as well as the National Stock Exchange.
*For further information, please visit:*
Max Group: www.maxgroup.net
Max India: www.maxindia.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/themaxgroup
Twitter: https://twitter.com/maxgroup
Reported by Business Wire India 13 hours ago.
↧
Bajaj Allianz GI launches 'Health Guard' insurance policy
Private sector non-life insurer, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance today said it has launched its redesigned comprehensive health insurance policy 'Health Guard' with the policy period extending to a maximum of three years.
Reported by DNA 12 hours ago.
↧
↧
Ron Paul: Will Congress Stop Forcing Pro-Life Americans To Subsidize Abortion? – OpEd
Last month marked 44 years since the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision declaring a constitutional right to abortion. Roe remains one of the Supreme Court’s most controversial decisions. Even some progressive legal theorists who favor legalized abortion have criticized Roe for judicial overreach and faulty reasoning.
Throughout my medical and political careers, I have opposed abortion. I believe abortion is the killing of an innocent human life and, thus, violates the non-aggression principle that is the basis of libertarianism. Unfortunately many libertarians, including some of my close allies, support legalized abortion. These pro-abortion libertarians make a serious philosophical error that undermines the libertarian cause. If the least accountable branch of government can unilaterally deny protection of the right to life to an entire class of persons, then none of our rights are safe.
While I oppose abortion, I also oppose federal laws imposing a nationwide ban on abortion. The federal government has no authority to legalize, outlaw, regulate, or fund abortion. Instead of further nationalizing abortion, pro-life Americas should advocate legislation ending federal involvement in abortion by restoring authority over abortion to the states.
Congress should also end all taxpayer funding of abortion and repeal Obamacare’s abortion mandates, along with the rest of Obamacare. Forcing pro-life Americans to subsidize what they believe to be murder is, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, “sinful and tyrannical.” That is why I was glad that one of the first actions of the new House of Representatives was to pass legislation ending all taxpayer support for abortion. Hopefully the bill will soon pass in the Senate and be signed into law by President Trump. Congress should follow this action by passing legislation allowing antiwar taxpayers to opt out of funding the military-industrial complex as well.
The House-passed bill also repeals Obamacare’s mandates forcing private businesses to cover abortion and birth control under their health insurance plans. Of course I oppose these mandates. But, unlike many other opponents of the mandates, I oppose them because they violate the rights of property and contract, not because they violate religious liberty.
Opposing the mandates because they violate the religious liberty of a few, instead of the property rights of all, means implicitly accepting the legitimacy of government mandates as long as special exemptions are granted for certain groups of people from certain groups of mandates.
President Trump has already protected pro-life taxpayers (and unborn children) by reinstating President Reagan’s Mexico City policy. The Mexico City policy forbids US taxpayer money from being used to support any international organization that performs abortions or promotes abortions. Using taxpayer money to perform and promote abortions overseas is not only unconstitutional and immoral, it also increases resentment of the US government. Unfortunately, as shown by the recent Yemen drone strikes, President Trump is unlikely to substantially change our militaristic foreign policy, which is responsible for the deaths of many innocent men, women, and children.
Ending taxpayer support for abortion is an important step toward restoring limited, constitutional government that respects the rights of all. However, those who oppose abortion must recognize that the pro-life cause’s path to victory will not come through politics. Instead, pro-lifers must focus on building a culture of life through continued education and, among other things, support for crisis pregnancy centers. These centers, along with scientific advances like ultrasound, are doing more to end abortion than any politician. Anti-abortion activists must also embrace a consistent ethic of life by opposing foreign policy militarism and the death penalty.
This article was published by RonPaul Institute. Reported by Eurasia Review 10 hours ago.
Throughout my medical and political careers, I have opposed abortion. I believe abortion is the killing of an innocent human life and, thus, violates the non-aggression principle that is the basis of libertarianism. Unfortunately many libertarians, including some of my close allies, support legalized abortion. These pro-abortion libertarians make a serious philosophical error that undermines the libertarian cause. If the least accountable branch of government can unilaterally deny protection of the right to life to an entire class of persons, then none of our rights are safe.
While I oppose abortion, I also oppose federal laws imposing a nationwide ban on abortion. The federal government has no authority to legalize, outlaw, regulate, or fund abortion. Instead of further nationalizing abortion, pro-life Americas should advocate legislation ending federal involvement in abortion by restoring authority over abortion to the states.
Congress should also end all taxpayer funding of abortion and repeal Obamacare’s abortion mandates, along with the rest of Obamacare. Forcing pro-life Americans to subsidize what they believe to be murder is, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson, “sinful and tyrannical.” That is why I was glad that one of the first actions of the new House of Representatives was to pass legislation ending all taxpayer support for abortion. Hopefully the bill will soon pass in the Senate and be signed into law by President Trump. Congress should follow this action by passing legislation allowing antiwar taxpayers to opt out of funding the military-industrial complex as well.
The House-passed bill also repeals Obamacare’s mandates forcing private businesses to cover abortion and birth control under their health insurance plans. Of course I oppose these mandates. But, unlike many other opponents of the mandates, I oppose them because they violate the rights of property and contract, not because they violate religious liberty.
Opposing the mandates because they violate the religious liberty of a few, instead of the property rights of all, means implicitly accepting the legitimacy of government mandates as long as special exemptions are granted for certain groups of people from certain groups of mandates.
President Trump has already protected pro-life taxpayers (and unborn children) by reinstating President Reagan’s Mexico City policy. The Mexico City policy forbids US taxpayer money from being used to support any international organization that performs abortions or promotes abortions. Using taxpayer money to perform and promote abortions overseas is not only unconstitutional and immoral, it also increases resentment of the US government. Unfortunately, as shown by the recent Yemen drone strikes, President Trump is unlikely to substantially change our militaristic foreign policy, which is responsible for the deaths of many innocent men, women, and children.
Ending taxpayer support for abortion is an important step toward restoring limited, constitutional government that respects the rights of all. However, those who oppose abortion must recognize that the pro-life cause’s path to victory will not come through politics. Instead, pro-lifers must focus on building a culture of life through continued education and, among other things, support for crisis pregnancy centers. These centers, along with scientific advances like ultrasound, are doing more to end abortion than any politician. Anti-abortion activists must also embrace a consistent ethic of life by opposing foreign policy militarism and the death penalty.
This article was published by RonPaul Institute. Reported by Eurasia Review 10 hours ago.
↧
Long Term Care Insurance: Here's What You Need to Know
After seeing their parents need Long Term Care, Richard and Barbara Adams searched for answers.
It was the fall of 2008 when Richard and Barbara Adams, recent retirees from the Buffalo School District and a former sales executive at a local newspaper, were on a two-week vacation in the Smoky Mountains when they got the call that Richard's mom had suffered a fall and was being rushed to the hospital. While in the hospital, she suffered a series of complications, and ultimately left the hospital bound for a nursing home near their home town. It was at this moment that the cost of Long Term Care became real for Richard and Barbara; the cost of care in eastern Virginia was nearly $7,500 a month, and Richard's mom only had enough cash to last about four months.
To further complicate things, it turned out that the elder Mrs. Adams was diagnosed with dementia while in rehab. The prospect of selling the family home was front in center for Richard, so he knew he needed a plan for himself and Barbara so they didn't burden their two adult children. Richard set out to find a plan for his mom.
The solution to paying for Long Term Care that kept turning up was long-term care insurance (LTCI). Long-term care insurance unfortunately would not work for Richard's mom as one must have good health in order to qualify, and experts generally recommend buying between age 45 and 65. In the case of Richard and Barbara, they both had good health so they would have a good shot at getting approved for a policy so they could protect their retirement.
*What is Long Term Care Insurance?*
Long Term Care Insurance is a financial planning tool used to protect a person's assets from the high cost of receiving care at home, in an assisted living, adult day care or in a nursing home. This type of care can exceed $90,000 per year in some states so insuring against your risk might make sense for some people.
There are about ten Long Term Care Insurance companies to consider, so using a tool like LTCtree.com will allow you to compare competitive quotes from multiple companies quickly and easily. You won't pay more in premiums by using such a service, the premiums are regulated by the states and don't change from agent to agent or site to site.
*Tax Benefits
*
Premiums for Long Term Care insurance average about $1,800 a year per person but can run as much as $3,000 per person, per year for a married couple, so finding tax advantages is always welcome. There are three major ways a typical consumer can benefit from owning a long-term care insurance policy:
HSA - Health Savings Accounts. Each year the IRS sets limits for how much premium can be paid via a health savings accounts, in 2017 up to $3,900 per person aged 61 and above can be paid, according to Publication 502 for the 2016 filing year. Even younger policyholders aged 51-60 can deduct up to $1,460 which is what a typical policy will cost.
Small Business Deduction. In some cases, if you file a Schedule C on your tax return, you can count the cost of a qualified LTC policy as a business expense much like other health insurance, but this may not apply to all filers, so be sure to consult a CPA if you take this route.
Qualified Medical Expenses. When your medical expenses exceed 10% of your AGI, you can include LTC premiums paid as part of that basket, but this is rare for healthy taxpayers as the 10% level can be prohibitively hard to reach, thankfully.
*Combining LTCI with Life Insurance*
So called "Hybrid" Long Term Care Insurance plans have been growing in popularity the past five years or so. The idea is to combine a life insurance policy (which pays a death benefit when you die) with accelerated benefits if you need long term care before death. These plans provide a premium guarantee where the insurance company can never come back and ask for a rate increase down the road unlike with traditional LTCI policies. Some hybrid long-term care policies even provide more Long Term Care than death benefit. An example policy with a $100,000 in a single premium payment (pay it once and you're done) would yield up to $1M in payments for Long Term Care services by age 80 for a healthy 45-year old.
Hybrid policies may be attractive, but there are dramatic differences in how these products are structured. Some hybrid LTCI products give the consumer a bigger death benefit, others give more long -term care benefits and while others will give an increasing cash value.
When Richard Adams' mom was of age and health to plan and buy a long-term care insurance policy they simply were not that popular and choices were limited. In today's world, there is no excuse to not plan for your potential long term care needs for your retirement. People are living longer as modern medicine is extending lives. The centenarian group is predicted to be one of the fastest growing groups by the year 2040 so if you have worked hard to save and build a nice nest egg, you may want to consider protecting it with a tool like long-term care insurance. Few viable alternatives exist to solves this problem, the insurance products have matured to a point where they are now recommended by most financial gurus.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.
It was the fall of 2008 when Richard and Barbara Adams, recent retirees from the Buffalo School District and a former sales executive at a local newspaper, were on a two-week vacation in the Smoky Mountains when they got the call that Richard's mom had suffered a fall and was being rushed to the hospital. While in the hospital, she suffered a series of complications, and ultimately left the hospital bound for a nursing home near their home town. It was at this moment that the cost of Long Term Care became real for Richard and Barbara; the cost of care in eastern Virginia was nearly $7,500 a month, and Richard's mom only had enough cash to last about four months.
To further complicate things, it turned out that the elder Mrs. Adams was diagnosed with dementia while in rehab. The prospect of selling the family home was front in center for Richard, so he knew he needed a plan for himself and Barbara so they didn't burden their two adult children. Richard set out to find a plan for his mom.
The solution to paying for Long Term Care that kept turning up was long-term care insurance (LTCI). Long-term care insurance unfortunately would not work for Richard's mom as one must have good health in order to qualify, and experts generally recommend buying between age 45 and 65. In the case of Richard and Barbara, they both had good health so they would have a good shot at getting approved for a policy so they could protect their retirement.
*What is Long Term Care Insurance?*
Long Term Care Insurance is a financial planning tool used to protect a person's assets from the high cost of receiving care at home, in an assisted living, adult day care or in a nursing home. This type of care can exceed $90,000 per year in some states so insuring against your risk might make sense for some people.
There are about ten Long Term Care Insurance companies to consider, so using a tool like LTCtree.com will allow you to compare competitive quotes from multiple companies quickly and easily. You won't pay more in premiums by using such a service, the premiums are regulated by the states and don't change from agent to agent or site to site.
*Tax Benefits
*
Premiums for Long Term Care insurance average about $1,800 a year per person but can run as much as $3,000 per person, per year for a married couple, so finding tax advantages is always welcome. There are three major ways a typical consumer can benefit from owning a long-term care insurance policy:
HSA - Health Savings Accounts. Each year the IRS sets limits for how much premium can be paid via a health savings accounts, in 2017 up to $3,900 per person aged 61 and above can be paid, according to Publication 502 for the 2016 filing year. Even younger policyholders aged 51-60 can deduct up to $1,460 which is what a typical policy will cost.
Small Business Deduction. In some cases, if you file a Schedule C on your tax return, you can count the cost of a qualified LTC policy as a business expense much like other health insurance, but this may not apply to all filers, so be sure to consult a CPA if you take this route.
Qualified Medical Expenses. When your medical expenses exceed 10% of your AGI, you can include LTC premiums paid as part of that basket, but this is rare for healthy taxpayers as the 10% level can be prohibitively hard to reach, thankfully.
*Combining LTCI with Life Insurance*
So called "Hybrid" Long Term Care Insurance plans have been growing in popularity the past five years or so. The idea is to combine a life insurance policy (which pays a death benefit when you die) with accelerated benefits if you need long term care before death. These plans provide a premium guarantee where the insurance company can never come back and ask for a rate increase down the road unlike with traditional LTCI policies. Some hybrid long-term care policies even provide more Long Term Care than death benefit. An example policy with a $100,000 in a single premium payment (pay it once and you're done) would yield up to $1M in payments for Long Term Care services by age 80 for a healthy 45-year old.
Hybrid policies may be attractive, but there are dramatic differences in how these products are structured. Some hybrid LTCI products give the consumer a bigger death benefit, others give more long -term care benefits and while others will give an increasing cash value.
When Richard Adams' mom was of age and health to plan and buy a long-term care insurance policy they simply were not that popular and choices were limited. In today's world, there is no excuse to not plan for your potential long term care needs for your retirement. People are living longer as modern medicine is extending lives. The centenarian group is predicted to be one of the fastest growing groups by the year 2040 so if you have worked hard to save and build a nice nest egg, you may want to consider protecting it with a tool like long-term care insurance. Few viable alternatives exist to solves this problem, the insurance products have matured to a point where they are now recommended by most financial gurus.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.
↧
A lesson from history: Repealing the ACA will make health insurance more expensive
Republicans want to replace the Affordable Care Act with something that President Donald Trump argues will provide “insurance for everybody” with “much lower deductibles.” While he did not give any specifics, history provides deep evidence that Republican alternatives are unl...
Reported by Raw Story 8 hours ago.
↧
6 Things to Love About Health Savings Accounts
Expensive health insurance got you down? Consider switching to a high-deductible plan coupled with an HSA -- there's a lot to love about this option.
Reported by Motley Fool 7 hours ago.
↧
↧
3 health insurance tax benefits you can get in 2017
Reported by MarketWatch 6 hours ago.
↧
More treatment options on offer for gold card holders
The Budget Bureau has agreed to a budget increase to pay for three additional healthcare services under the gold card health insurance scheme in the next fiscal year.
Reported by Bangkok Post 2 hours ago.
↧
The Immorality Of Evangelical Christians In The Age Of Trump
On Dec.14, 2012, a mentally unstable young man shot and killed 20 children at Sandy Hook Elementary School. One of those kids, the youngest, was Noah Pozner. As a parent myself, I cannot come close to even fathoming the pain and suffering his senseless slaughter caused his parents. What could be worse than having your child murdered? Little else. And yet, the pain of the Pozners did not end there. In the aftermath of the massacre, a handful of lunatics began falsely claiming that the Sandy Hook shooting never happened - that it was all made up. And Noah's father became the target of these cruel individuals; he has been taunted and tormented by their on-going attempt to frame the murder of his son as a hoax. Leading this immoral, sadistic campaign is a heartless man named Alex Jones, who uses his media might to perpetually lie about Sandy Hook, claiming that the shooting was fake, and blatantly taunting the parents of the children who were murdered there.
And Alex Jones is supported and encouraged by our current president. In fact, just days after losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes and yet winning the electoral college ponzi scheme, Donald Trump personally called Alex Jones to thank him for all that he does.
Such moral depravity is emblematic of Donald Trump. This billionaire blow-hard, this pussy-grabbing misogynist, is awash in immoral relations and immoral actions. He defends and respects Vladimir Putin, a despot who has personally ordered the assassination of men, women, and children. He appoints the most racist Senator in the United States - a man who spent his life fighting against civil rights and then lied about it only weeks ago in preparation for his confirmation hearings - as the nation's Attorney General. His closest advisor, who is now virtually running the country, is a thrice-divorced, alimony-evading shill of white nationalists. His leading spokesperson daily peddles "alternative facts" - or what normal human beings refer to as bald-faced lies.
From his mocking of the disabled to his claim that an Indiana-born judge can't be partial because of his Mexican heritage, from the federal lawsuit filed against him for explicitly discriminating against African Americans to his monstrous tax evading, from lying about the size of the crowd at his inauguration to his lies about millions of people voting illegally, from his tweeting like a teenager about everything except the recent murder of six Muslims praying in a mosque in Quebec by a white Christian, from his bragging about sexual assault to his attempts to shut the doors of America to human beings fleeing violence, Donald Trump has proven himself - by the hour - as a cold, heartless lover of lies and hater of humanity.
And 81% of white Evangelicals voted for him.
That's right: those Americans among us who claim to love Jesus the most, who attend church the most, and read the Bible the most, and pray the most, and claim to be the most loving of God, are largely responsible for making this pock of a man the leader of our country, who is already causing - and will continue to cause -- an inordinate amount of flagrant deception, pain, misery, violence, and immorality in our nation and the world.
And to top it all off, these Evangelical Christians have the perpetual gall to take the moral high-ground. They claim that they vote their values. They claim that secular people are immoral. The sanctimony reeks almost as bad as the hypocrisy.
* * *
Morality is a very simple thing: it is about alleviating the pain or suffering of sentient beings, helping when one can, not harming others, and treating people the way you yourself would want to be treated. End of story. Given this very simple and obvious explication of morality, we can clearly see Evangelical Christianity for what it really is, at least in its North American, early 21st century incarnation: immoral, uncaring, and blatantly harmful. Let's consider some obvious examples:
Banning Refugees. There are human beings fleeing violence, in need of a safe haven. The moral thing to do it to allow a fair amount of these men and women in to the United States, as is this nation's ability and heritage. Donald Trump issues a ban on allowing such refugees in, despite the fact that not a single terrorist attack has ever been committed by anyone from those banned countries. Additionally, there are individuals from these Muslim majority nations who are working on scientific advancements, individuals who hold green cards and have lived and worked and contributed to Americans society for decades, individuals who pose no threat whatsoever. Yet Trump bans them. And the Evangelicals sing Hallelujah!
Healthcare. In the United States, health is directly determined by wealth. The more money you have, the better medical treatment you receive. The less money you have, the worse. And in some cases, none at all. Millions of Americans lack health insurance. This is immoral. Obamacare - despite its shortcomings -- has alleviated the suffering of millions of Americans. Trump intends to dismantle Obamacare. And the Evangelicals say Praise the Lord!
Global warming. The factual evidence is clear and abundant: we are destroying the planet. Because of our greed and consumption and fossil fuels and fracking, we are heating up planet Earth. The results will be catastrophic: prolonged pain and suffering for all. Trump claims that climate change is a lie invented by the Chinese. And the Evangelicals shout Amen!
We can also talk about racial injustice, gender inequality, the prison industrial complex, death with dignity, the brutal oppression of Palestinians - and on and on. So many moral issues, and on every single one, the Trump Evangelicals take the side of the oppressor, the side of the powerful, the side of the wealthy, the side of the corrupt, the side of the sinister.
Oh, well, they do care about fetuses. That's true. They care about them so much, that everything else - from global warming to a lying, incompetent twitter president, from racism to gun violence, from Native American rights to corporate cronyism - don't matter at all.
* * *
I realize that this blog will not change a single mind. There is not a single Evangelical Trump supporter out there who will read this and think, "Hey, he's got a point." If anything, the opposite will occur: my anger will generate defensiveness. More anger. I will be dismissed as a secular elitist. A politically correct professor. A whiny Jew.
So why write it? Because, like many of my fellow Americans, I am distraught. I am fearful. I feel the need to declare the angry truth that the strongly pious among us are enabling a wicked, fraudulent presidential administration. This is our reality. Let's call it for what it is: Evangelically-subsidized immorality.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.
And Alex Jones is supported and encouraged by our current president. In fact, just days after losing the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes and yet winning the electoral college ponzi scheme, Donald Trump personally called Alex Jones to thank him for all that he does.
Such moral depravity is emblematic of Donald Trump. This billionaire blow-hard, this pussy-grabbing misogynist, is awash in immoral relations and immoral actions. He defends and respects Vladimir Putin, a despot who has personally ordered the assassination of men, women, and children. He appoints the most racist Senator in the United States - a man who spent his life fighting against civil rights and then lied about it only weeks ago in preparation for his confirmation hearings - as the nation's Attorney General. His closest advisor, who is now virtually running the country, is a thrice-divorced, alimony-evading shill of white nationalists. His leading spokesperson daily peddles "alternative facts" - or what normal human beings refer to as bald-faced lies.
From his mocking of the disabled to his claim that an Indiana-born judge can't be partial because of his Mexican heritage, from the federal lawsuit filed against him for explicitly discriminating against African Americans to his monstrous tax evading, from lying about the size of the crowd at his inauguration to his lies about millions of people voting illegally, from his tweeting like a teenager about everything except the recent murder of six Muslims praying in a mosque in Quebec by a white Christian, from his bragging about sexual assault to his attempts to shut the doors of America to human beings fleeing violence, Donald Trump has proven himself - by the hour - as a cold, heartless lover of lies and hater of humanity.
And 81% of white Evangelicals voted for him.
That's right: those Americans among us who claim to love Jesus the most, who attend church the most, and read the Bible the most, and pray the most, and claim to be the most loving of God, are largely responsible for making this pock of a man the leader of our country, who is already causing - and will continue to cause -- an inordinate amount of flagrant deception, pain, misery, violence, and immorality in our nation and the world.
And to top it all off, these Evangelical Christians have the perpetual gall to take the moral high-ground. They claim that they vote their values. They claim that secular people are immoral. The sanctimony reeks almost as bad as the hypocrisy.
* * *
Morality is a very simple thing: it is about alleviating the pain or suffering of sentient beings, helping when one can, not harming others, and treating people the way you yourself would want to be treated. End of story. Given this very simple and obvious explication of morality, we can clearly see Evangelical Christianity for what it really is, at least in its North American, early 21st century incarnation: immoral, uncaring, and blatantly harmful. Let's consider some obvious examples:
Banning Refugees. There are human beings fleeing violence, in need of a safe haven. The moral thing to do it to allow a fair amount of these men and women in to the United States, as is this nation's ability and heritage. Donald Trump issues a ban on allowing such refugees in, despite the fact that not a single terrorist attack has ever been committed by anyone from those banned countries. Additionally, there are individuals from these Muslim majority nations who are working on scientific advancements, individuals who hold green cards and have lived and worked and contributed to Americans society for decades, individuals who pose no threat whatsoever. Yet Trump bans them. And the Evangelicals sing Hallelujah!
Healthcare. In the United States, health is directly determined by wealth. The more money you have, the better medical treatment you receive. The less money you have, the worse. And in some cases, none at all. Millions of Americans lack health insurance. This is immoral. Obamacare - despite its shortcomings -- has alleviated the suffering of millions of Americans. Trump intends to dismantle Obamacare. And the Evangelicals say Praise the Lord!
Global warming. The factual evidence is clear and abundant: we are destroying the planet. Because of our greed and consumption and fossil fuels and fracking, we are heating up planet Earth. The results will be catastrophic: prolonged pain and suffering for all. Trump claims that climate change is a lie invented by the Chinese. And the Evangelicals shout Amen!
We can also talk about racial injustice, gender inequality, the prison industrial complex, death with dignity, the brutal oppression of Palestinians - and on and on. So many moral issues, and on every single one, the Trump Evangelicals take the side of the oppressor, the side of the powerful, the side of the wealthy, the side of the corrupt, the side of the sinister.
Oh, well, they do care about fetuses. That's true. They care about them so much, that everything else - from global warming to a lying, incompetent twitter president, from racism to gun violence, from Native American rights to corporate cronyism - don't matter at all.
* * *
I realize that this blog will not change a single mind. There is not a single Evangelical Trump supporter out there who will read this and think, "Hey, he's got a point." If anything, the opposite will occur: my anger will generate defensiveness. More anger. I will be dismissed as a secular elitist. A politically correct professor. A whiny Jew.
So why write it? Because, like many of my fellow Americans, I am distraught. I am fearful. I feel the need to declare the angry truth that the strongly pious among us are enabling a wicked, fraudulent presidential administration. This is our reality. Let's call it for what it is: Evangelically-subsidized immorality.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 2 hours ago.
↧
Staying Grounded In The Midst Of Chaos
Dumping coal slurry into rivers. Deregulating Wall Street. Dangerous cabinet picks. New tension with our allies in Australia and Mexico and NATO. Turning a blind eye to Russian aggression in Ukraine and interference with our election. Trump's schoolyard antics of taunting Iran, China, North Korea in hopes of starting a fight. The dismantling of the EPA. Millions of Americans losing health insurance. Public education threatened. Supreme Court nominees, the Muslim ban, the white supremacist, war monger Stephen Bannon who has the President's ear and is now on the Security Council.
Yes, it's overwhelming and it's meant to overwhelm. Every day new developments are thrown at us to disorient, divide and confuse us. Shock and awe on a psychological level. Most of us are stressed, outraged, fearful as these events unfold. That is a normal and healthy reaction. If you aren't feeling these symptoms, then you aren't really paying attention.
It's no wonder that Orwell's 1984 is a best seller again. Remember its motto? Slavery is freedom; ignorance is strength; war is peace. In this world of paradox, what is true is what is opposite to what is said. Trump's bullying, his slash and burn and take no prisoners is supposed to make us safe. Do you feel safer in a chaotic America?
On Groundhog Day I was envious of the groundhog because it could go back in its hole for six weeks.
How do we stay grounded when our world has been turned upside down?
*Trust yourself and the reality you know and see.*
First,* you are not paranoid* for not trusting this administration. We need a new lens for decoding their message. What is said is the opposite of what is real. We have a mentally unstable president who blatantly lies to us, along with his spokespeople Conway and Spicer and Hannity. The propaganda machine was in full swing during the election and its still here now. Trump repeatedly says, "believe me," which means don't believe him. They can call the lies alternative facts but they are still fabricated stories.
Trump supporters thought Obama was weak and that Trump is strong, but it's actually the opposite. It takes a lot more strength to collaborate than it does to bully. Trump's biggest limitation is that he has no capacity, no skills for tolerating vulnerability in himself. He cannot admit to making a mistake or to being wrong; therefore he cannot learn. Because it is so threatening to his identity, he compensates, digs in deeper, lies more, and then accuses others of what he himself cannot face about himself. He mocks a "so called judge" because he doesn't want to admit he is a "so called president." Everything around him is "a disaster," when in fact he is the disaster. He shames others because he cannot feel shame. He humiliates others in order to not be humiliated. The best defense is a good offense.
So if you feel confused about what is being said and what is true, this is his goal. When he deregulates the financial industry that brought the economy to its knees in 2008, and says this will help economic growth and job creation, don't believe it. Job creation and economic growth is the generic blanket that justifies everything he is trying to dismantle. He inherits a 4 percent unemployment rate; that's not exactly a job crisis. Let's see what he does to that.
What you can do:
*Trust your instincts. *
Paul Ryan initially said that Trump was unfit and that the Muslim ban was illegal. Now he has rationalized, white washed what he knew was true. I wonder how much damage Trump has to inflict on the country before the Republicans will find a backbone to stand up to him. Don't fall for that trap where they deny what they said or did. Trust your own eyes and ears. All that is happening is not normal.
*Seek common ground with Trump supporters. *
Obviously, not all Trump supporters are fascists, supremacists, racists, misogynists, a fringe that have found themselves with mainstream power. What we have in common is that the majority of the country wanted change, from Bernie supporters to Trump. We wanted a government that was working for the people, not only big business. We wanted to see the economic gap between rich and poor narrow. We just had different ideas about how to get there. But I don't think that even Trump supporters were counting on Trump setting up a government for and by oil companies. Oil companies' influence until now has been covert; now it's overt.
Trump supporters say they are happy with Trump's actions because he is doing what he said he would do in his campaign. But this chaos he is creating by breaking traditions, rules, and American values, is actually a symptom of a deeper change he is trying to create and one he never stated in his campaign.
He never said that he was going to dismantle democracy and set up an authoritarian regime which he would head. Is Putin his role model? Now if we asked our Trump supporter friends if they voted for democracy to be dismantled, do you think they would have signed on?
In order to achieve this new political order Trump has to throw out checks and balances, and he does this by discrediting our institutions daily. Judges carry no weight with him when they disagree with him; he knows more than the military; he doesn't need briefings. By discrediting our institutions, he creates confusion, a vacuum that he is most happy to fill with his own ideas that tend toward totalitarianism.
*Be critical thinkers*
Trump's favorite daily rant is to discredit the media who more enabled than disabled his rise to the top. By planting seeds of doubt as to what people can believe, he tries to control the narrative. There is a lot of fake news, but lets call it what it is, propaganda. However, there are many credible media outlets with quality investigative reporting. Forbes has provided a credible list.
They are not always perfect but they don't out and out lie or twist the truth to be something else.
All of us need to become better at critical thinking.
*Now is the time to use your voice. *
Trump has created chaos but herein lies an opportunity. Out of chaos a new order can emerge that represents the people, not Bannon's ideas, if we stay engaged, diligent, resistant and keep an eye on that light of hope. We are called to use our creativity. It's an opportunity to see that we are more alike than different. It's an opportunity for our shared humanity to shine. What crosses partisan lines is that we love America and we love democracy. We can be outraged but it is persistence that will make the difference, like water wears away rock. Trump rode a wave of anger into the White House. A wave of anger or violence isn't going to flush him out. That feeds into his script. Truth and courage to stand for what is right and not back down is how we will prevail.
It has been heartening to see people's activism, realizing that we cannot take our freedoms for granted. This process can make clearer our vision as Americans.
As Elie Wiesel once said, "Sometimes it's only through the ruins that you can see the sky."
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 hour ago.
Yes, it's overwhelming and it's meant to overwhelm. Every day new developments are thrown at us to disorient, divide and confuse us. Shock and awe on a psychological level. Most of us are stressed, outraged, fearful as these events unfold. That is a normal and healthy reaction. If you aren't feeling these symptoms, then you aren't really paying attention.
It's no wonder that Orwell's 1984 is a best seller again. Remember its motto? Slavery is freedom; ignorance is strength; war is peace. In this world of paradox, what is true is what is opposite to what is said. Trump's bullying, his slash and burn and take no prisoners is supposed to make us safe. Do you feel safer in a chaotic America?
On Groundhog Day I was envious of the groundhog because it could go back in its hole for six weeks.
How do we stay grounded when our world has been turned upside down?
*Trust yourself and the reality you know and see.*
First,* you are not paranoid* for not trusting this administration. We need a new lens for decoding their message. What is said is the opposite of what is real. We have a mentally unstable president who blatantly lies to us, along with his spokespeople Conway and Spicer and Hannity. The propaganda machine was in full swing during the election and its still here now. Trump repeatedly says, "believe me," which means don't believe him. They can call the lies alternative facts but they are still fabricated stories.
Trump supporters thought Obama was weak and that Trump is strong, but it's actually the opposite. It takes a lot more strength to collaborate than it does to bully. Trump's biggest limitation is that he has no capacity, no skills for tolerating vulnerability in himself. He cannot admit to making a mistake or to being wrong; therefore he cannot learn. Because it is so threatening to his identity, he compensates, digs in deeper, lies more, and then accuses others of what he himself cannot face about himself. He mocks a "so called judge" because he doesn't want to admit he is a "so called president." Everything around him is "a disaster," when in fact he is the disaster. He shames others because he cannot feel shame. He humiliates others in order to not be humiliated. The best defense is a good offense.
So if you feel confused about what is being said and what is true, this is his goal. When he deregulates the financial industry that brought the economy to its knees in 2008, and says this will help economic growth and job creation, don't believe it. Job creation and economic growth is the generic blanket that justifies everything he is trying to dismantle. He inherits a 4 percent unemployment rate; that's not exactly a job crisis. Let's see what he does to that.
What you can do:
*Trust your instincts. *
Paul Ryan initially said that Trump was unfit and that the Muslim ban was illegal. Now he has rationalized, white washed what he knew was true. I wonder how much damage Trump has to inflict on the country before the Republicans will find a backbone to stand up to him. Don't fall for that trap where they deny what they said or did. Trust your own eyes and ears. All that is happening is not normal.
*Seek common ground with Trump supporters. *
Obviously, not all Trump supporters are fascists, supremacists, racists, misogynists, a fringe that have found themselves with mainstream power. What we have in common is that the majority of the country wanted change, from Bernie supporters to Trump. We wanted a government that was working for the people, not only big business. We wanted to see the economic gap between rich and poor narrow. We just had different ideas about how to get there. But I don't think that even Trump supporters were counting on Trump setting up a government for and by oil companies. Oil companies' influence until now has been covert; now it's overt.
Trump supporters say they are happy with Trump's actions because he is doing what he said he would do in his campaign. But this chaos he is creating by breaking traditions, rules, and American values, is actually a symptom of a deeper change he is trying to create and one he never stated in his campaign.
He never said that he was going to dismantle democracy and set up an authoritarian regime which he would head. Is Putin his role model? Now if we asked our Trump supporter friends if they voted for democracy to be dismantled, do you think they would have signed on?
In order to achieve this new political order Trump has to throw out checks and balances, and he does this by discrediting our institutions daily. Judges carry no weight with him when they disagree with him; he knows more than the military; he doesn't need briefings. By discrediting our institutions, he creates confusion, a vacuum that he is most happy to fill with his own ideas that tend toward totalitarianism.
*Be critical thinkers*
Trump's favorite daily rant is to discredit the media who more enabled than disabled his rise to the top. By planting seeds of doubt as to what people can believe, he tries to control the narrative. There is a lot of fake news, but lets call it what it is, propaganda. However, there are many credible media outlets with quality investigative reporting. Forbes has provided a credible list.
They are not always perfect but they don't out and out lie or twist the truth to be something else.
All of us need to become better at critical thinking.
*Now is the time to use your voice. *
Trump has created chaos but herein lies an opportunity. Out of chaos a new order can emerge that represents the people, not Bannon's ideas, if we stay engaged, diligent, resistant and keep an eye on that light of hope. We are called to use our creativity. It's an opportunity to see that we are more alike than different. It's an opportunity for our shared humanity to shine. What crosses partisan lines is that we love America and we love democracy. We can be outraged but it is persistence that will make the difference, like water wears away rock. Trump rode a wave of anger into the White House. A wave of anger or violence isn't going to flush him out. That feeds into his script. Truth and courage to stand for what is right and not back down is how we will prevail.
It has been heartening to see people's activism, realizing that we cannot take our freedoms for granted. This process can make clearer our vision as Americans.
As Elie Wiesel once said, "Sometimes it's only through the ruins that you can see the sky."
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 1 hour ago.
↧
↧
Republican Version Of 'Cadillac Tax' In Obamacare Replacement Drawing Fire From Employers And Unions
Back in 2009, the Obama administration drew a lot of fire from employers and labor unions over Obamacare's so-called *"Cadillac Tax"*, a tax on healthcare premiums over a certain threshold. Apparently, the United Auto Workers in the Midwest had grown accustomed to their unlimited supply of Viagra, completely free of charge, and were unwilling to 'go down' without a fight.
Fast forward eight years and now several Republican plans for replacing the ACA include their own curb on generous health plans: a cap on how much of employer-provided health benefits could be shielded from taxes. Such a cap could force certain workers to start paying income tax on a portion of the cost of their coverage.
Currently, when an employee receives health insurance, the value of that benefit isn’t subject to either income or payroll taxes. On average, employer coverage for a single worker last year ran $6,435, while for a family, the tab was $18,142, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation. *Employers bore about 82% of the cost for single plans, and about 70% for family coverage.*
While the Republican plan would limit the deductibility of premium payments as opposed to implementing a special tax, as the Wall Street Journal points out,* “in the end, they both would have similar effects,” including pushing companies toward skinnier health plans,* according to Steve Wojcik, an official with the National Business Group on Health, which represents employers. “It’s six of one, a half-dozen of the other.”
Of course, many politicians in Washington D.C. view a tax on "Cadillac" plans as a huge revenue opportunity that *could add $20 billion annually to federal coffers by 2025.*
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said recently he has long supported a cap on the health-benefits tax exclusion, but that it was an “open question” where Congress would end up on the issue. Mr. Hatch in a statement said, “We must study the open-ended tax preference and its impact on costs for employees and increased spending by employers.”
The tax exclusion for employer health benefits represents a *huge pool of potential federal revenue, estimated at $266 billion in 2016*, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Capping the exclusion would bring in a small fraction of that total. The Cadillac tax, the CBO said, would *raise federal revenue by $2 billion in 2020, growing to $20 billion in 2025*—money that could help defray the cost of expanded health coverage under the ACA.
That said, *it's not just C-suite executives who would be hit by the "Cadillac tax" as many unionized employees are also at risk,* after decades of negotiating ever better healthcare plans far in excess of what their counterparts in non-unionized, private-sector jobs get.
Still, the current proposals to limit the tax exclusion are drawing sharp pushback from employers, which say the change could limit their flexibility and add to their costs, and labor groups, which fear their members could end up paying additional taxes. A December letter to members of Congress that criticized both the Cadillac tax and the health-benefits exclusion cap was signed by groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Retail Federation.
The cap is also drawing opposition from the Alliance to Fight the 40, a coalition that lobbies against the Cadillac tax, which would impose a 40% levy on the value of health plans above certain cutoff levels. Last month, the group, which includes employers, unions and health companies, paid to blast an ad at electronic devices in the vicinity of congressional Republicans’ Philadelphia retreat, with the message: “Taxes on employer-sponsored health care are a bad idea.”
*Members of unions that have negotiated robust health benefits are among those likely to be hit by taxes tied to high-cost plans.* Capping the health-benefits exclusion* “would be a huge tax increase on the middle class,”* said D. Taylor, president of Unite Here, which represents hospitality workers.
Meanwhile, economists have long said the tax exclusion for health benefits has negative effects, encouraging employers to offer too-generous health coverage. That, they argue, *leads to excessive health spending because employees are shielded from the full cost of medical care.* The existing health-benefits tax exclusion* “has been an important factor in promoting the kinds of inefficiencies in the health-care system that we have seen,”* said Joseph Antos, an expert at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, who supports a cap on the employer health-benefits tax exclusion.
Of course, the real question is how Trump's largely unionized supporters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania will respond to an assault on their unlimited chiropractic visits, 'therapeutic' massages and Viagra. Reported by Zero Hedge 2 hours ago.
Fast forward eight years and now several Republican plans for replacing the ACA include their own curb on generous health plans: a cap on how much of employer-provided health benefits could be shielded from taxes. Such a cap could force certain workers to start paying income tax on a portion of the cost of their coverage.
Currently, when an employee receives health insurance, the value of that benefit isn’t subject to either income or payroll taxes. On average, employer coverage for a single worker last year ran $6,435, while for a family, the tab was $18,142, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation. *Employers bore about 82% of the cost for single plans, and about 70% for family coverage.*
While the Republican plan would limit the deductibility of premium payments as opposed to implementing a special tax, as the Wall Street Journal points out,* “in the end, they both would have similar effects,” including pushing companies toward skinnier health plans,* according to Steve Wojcik, an official with the National Business Group on Health, which represents employers. “It’s six of one, a half-dozen of the other.”
Of course, many politicians in Washington D.C. view a tax on "Cadillac" plans as a huge revenue opportunity that *could add $20 billion annually to federal coffers by 2025.*
House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) said recently he has long supported a cap on the health-benefits tax exclusion, but that it was an “open question” where Congress would end up on the issue. Mr. Hatch in a statement said, “We must study the open-ended tax preference and its impact on costs for employees and increased spending by employers.”
The tax exclusion for employer health benefits represents a *huge pool of potential federal revenue, estimated at $266 billion in 2016*, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Capping the exclusion would bring in a small fraction of that total. The Cadillac tax, the CBO said, would *raise federal revenue by $2 billion in 2020, growing to $20 billion in 2025*—money that could help defray the cost of expanded health coverage under the ACA.
That said, *it's not just C-suite executives who would be hit by the "Cadillac tax" as many unionized employees are also at risk,* after decades of negotiating ever better healthcare plans far in excess of what their counterparts in non-unionized, private-sector jobs get.
Still, the current proposals to limit the tax exclusion are drawing sharp pushback from employers, which say the change could limit their flexibility and add to their costs, and labor groups, which fear their members could end up paying additional taxes. A December letter to members of Congress that criticized both the Cadillac tax and the health-benefits exclusion cap was signed by groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Retail Federation.
The cap is also drawing opposition from the Alliance to Fight the 40, a coalition that lobbies against the Cadillac tax, which would impose a 40% levy on the value of health plans above certain cutoff levels. Last month, the group, which includes employers, unions and health companies, paid to blast an ad at electronic devices in the vicinity of congressional Republicans’ Philadelphia retreat, with the message: “Taxes on employer-sponsored health care are a bad idea.”
*Members of unions that have negotiated robust health benefits are among those likely to be hit by taxes tied to high-cost plans.* Capping the health-benefits exclusion* “would be a huge tax increase on the middle class,”* said D. Taylor, president of Unite Here, which represents hospitality workers.
Meanwhile, economists have long said the tax exclusion for health benefits has negative effects, encouraging employers to offer too-generous health coverage. That, they argue, *leads to excessive health spending because employees are shielded from the full cost of medical care.* The existing health-benefits tax exclusion* “has been an important factor in promoting the kinds of inefficiencies in the health-care system that we have seen,”* said Joseph Antos, an expert at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, who supports a cap on the employer health-benefits tax exclusion.
Of course, the real question is how Trump's largely unionized supporters in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania will respond to an assault on their unlimited chiropractic visits, 'therapeutic' massages and Viagra. Reported by Zero Hedge 2 hours ago.
↧
Zimbabwe: Civil Servants Reject Health Insurance Scheme
[The Herald] Civil servants yesterday rejected the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS), saying the prevailing economic conditions are not conducive for such a scheme as Government is struggling to meet its current obligations to its employees. Civil servants, through the Apex Council, a body bringing together civil servants' unions, said although the scheme is noble, but Government does not have financial muscle to augment its sustenance because of the negative economic conditions.
Reported by allAfrica.com 19 hours ago.
↧
A.M. Best Briefing: Performance in the Indian Non-Life Market is Stalling
*Business Wire India*A three-year trend of performance improvements in India’s non-life market has come to a halt, as reflected by weakening industry profitability ratios since 2015. According to a new *A.M. Best* briefing, this could result in a reduction in insurance companies’ risk-adjusted capitalization positions as insurance risk growth (approximated by premiums) outpaces capital growth. The Best’s Briefing, titled, “Performance in the Indian Non-Life Market is Stalling,” states that premium growth in India’s non-life insurance market has been led by the unprofitable health insurance business, which has grown into the single largest business line, ahead of motor own damage. This has added to insurance risk growth in the market but has not contributed to capital growth. It will be interesting to see how the new government-supported crop insurance scheme will impact this dynamic. The performance deterioration seems to be mostly concentrated among the better capitalized government-owned insurers, which roughly underwrite 50% of the market’s non-life insurance risks, while holding slightly more than 70% of the industry’s capital and surplus. Nevertheless, improving operating performance is important for these players as their risk-adjusted capitalization is on a declining trend and the high proportion of fair value reserves leaves their risk-adjusted capitalization more vulnerable to capital market volatility. To access the full copy of this briefing, please visit http://www3.ambest.com/bestweek/purchase.asp?record_code=258482. *A.M. Best is the world’s oldest and most authoritative insurance rating and information source. For more information, visit *www.ambest.com. *Copyright © 2017 by A.M. Best Rating Services, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.*
*ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.*
View source version on businesswire.com: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170213005999/en/ Reported by Business Wire India 17 hours ago.
*ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.*
View source version on businesswire.com: http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170213005999/en/ Reported by Business Wire India 17 hours ago.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....