OMG! Glacier melt may have become “unstoppable.

[MARIS61]

It was part of the payment for services rendered.
All was going well until ObamaCare added a tax for the payer to pay if they continued to provide the insurance. It also made it legal to stop providing the insurance.

Your dishonest employer simply used a future (Obama already suspended the penalty for now) loophole to renege on his/her wage and perk agreement with you. At the least you should receive the cash equivalent from your employer, or should report them to the state. The current Oregon State Labor Commissioner is the most agressive we've ever had. Honest employers nationwide continue to honor their contracts and pension agreements.

 

[Denny Crane]

Your dishonest employer simply used a future (Obama already suspended the penalty for now) loophole to renege on his/her wage and perk agreement with you. At the least you should receive the cash equivalent from your employer, or should report them to the state. The current Oregon State Labor Commissioner is the most agressive we've ever had. Honest employers nationwide continue to honor their contracts and pension agreements.

Several million plans were cancelled before Obama illegally changed the law (he's being sued over that in several venues).

 

[barfo]

uh, I have not checked all companies but I do know of at least a million people that had they insurance coverage discontinued when the tax was implemented and it became a legal alternative to discontinue the coverage instead. It does seem intuitively obvious the choice the company would take and the choice the government preferred they choose.

The articles you put forward are pertinent to employees, not retired employees. The is no fine for dropping them, as a matter of fact that is part of the problem, the act made it entirely legal to drop us, we have no recourse.

You make a good point that those articles are about employees rather than retirees. How about this one instead?

http://business.time.com/2013/09/09/what-obamacare-means-for-corporate-retiree-insurance-coverage/

I think you may be putting the blame where it doesn't belong. But I could be wrong about that, and would be happy to review evidence to the contrary.

barfo

 

[PDXFonz]

Atlantis hasn't happened yet.

 

[MarAzul]

You make a good point that those articles are about employees rather than retirees. How about this one instead?

http://business.time.com/2013/09/09/what-obamacare-means-for-corporate-retiree-insurance-coverage/

I think you may be putting the blame where it doesn't belong. But I could be wrong about that, and would be happy to review evidence to the contrary.

barfo

Well let me keep it simple. The ACR gave the Corporations a choice of two options where retired Employees are concerned.

1. Continue taking the risk of insuring the retirees and spouses. Pay an additional tax if you do.

2. Forget about it. You are no longer required to cover these people.
If you take this option, you may provide them with a HRA to replace the Insurance previously provide, IF they buy insurance.

Fine. except My wife needs insurance not I, but I have to buy it by regulations in order to get the HRA funded. So about half the fund is squandered to get the part that pays for her insurance. Last year it worked, this year it doesn't.

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...-care-insurance-cancellation-column/17353673/

 

[MarAzul]

Just sent a note to Gina Dearth, the director of the Port of Bandon regarding an opinion of hers published in the local news paper.

She is opposing the creation of a National Marine Sanctuary that will encompass all the ocean between Bandon and Port Orford out as far as international treaties will permitt.

The note:
I just read Gina's opinion in Western World. Two lines in this opinion stood out to me.

"Climate change and ocean health are fear tactics."

"Turning over vast areas of ocean waters to the federal government to manage is beyond comprehension."

Bravo! And I would like to thank her for having the courage to speak the truth for all to hear.

We are very near the end of a cycle of the interglacial cycle where warming always occurs and oceans always rise.
The seas have risen some 190 feet now, covering the land bridge that enabled the original people to North America.
This bridge has long been covered by the rising seas which are most likely to rise perhaps .5 feet more.

This is the first cycle of the interglacial cycle that man has been present so this is new experience but no reason to panic.
Surely there is no reason to blame man for this cycle,
there is nothing different from prior cycles except man is here and the Dinosaur is not.

 

[Denny Crane]

Somewhere barfo is shrieking in terror.

 

[MarAzul]

Just sent the following note to Gina Dearth, the director of the Port of Bandon concerning her opinion published in the local new paper. She is opposing the creation of a National Marine Sanctuary the will stretch from Bandon to Port Orford and out as far as international treaty will permit.

The Note:

I just read Gina's opinion in Western World. Two lines in this opinion stood out to me.

"Climate change and ocean health are fear tactics."

"Turning over vast areas of ocean waters to the federal government to manage is beyond comprehension."

Bravo! And I would like to thank her for having the courage to speak the truth for all to hear.

We are very near the end of a cycle of the interglacial cycle where warming always occurs and oceans always rise.
The seas have risen some 190 feet now, covering the land bridge that enabled the original people to North America.
This bridge has long been covered by the rising seas which are most likely to rise perhaps .5 feet more.

This is the first cycle of the interglacial cycle that man has been present so this is new experience but no reason to panic.
Surely there is no reason to blame man for this cycle,
there is nothing different from prior cycles except man is here and the Dinosaur is not.

 

[riverman]

Holy shit did I misread this thread title...I thought it would be about glaciers and it's another Obamacare debate..sheesh

 

[riverman]

Just sent a note to Gina Dearth, the director of the Port of Bandon regarding an opinion of hers published in the local news paper.

She is opposing the creation of a National Marine Sanctuary that will encompass all the ocean between Bandon and Port Orford out as far as international treaties will permitt.

The note:
I just read Gina's opinion in Western World. Two lines in this opinion stood out to me.

"Climate change and ocean health are fear tactics."

"Turning over vast areas of ocean waters to the federal government to manage is beyond comprehension."

Bravo! And I would like to thank her for having the courage to speak the truth for all to hear.

We are very near the end of a cycle of the interglacial cycle where warming always occurs and oceans always rise.
The seas have risen some 190 feet now, covering the land bridge that enabled the original people to North America.
This bridge has long been covered by the rising seas which are most likely to rise perhaps .5 feet more.

This is the first cycle of the interglacial cycle that man has been present so this is new experience but no reason to panic.
Surely there is no reason to blame man for this cycle,
there is nothing different from prior cycles except man is here and the Dinosaur is not.

Thank you for sharing this and ignore my last post, hadn't read yours yet. I wonder why they don't just use those giant foil reflectors on the poles and allow them to freeze over again.

 

[Denny Crane]

Actual global warming sensors (temperature stations).

Plenty more like these

 

[Denny Crane]

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...104577534830901741156.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

No, the reason that science progresses despite confirmation bias is partly that it makes testable predictions, but even more that it prevents monopoly. By dispersing its incentives among many different centers, it lets scientists check each other's prejudices. When a discipline defers to a single authority and demands adherence to a set of beliefs, then it becomes a cult.

A recent example is the case of malaria and climate. In the early days of global-warming research, scientists argued that warming would worsen malaria by increasing the range of mosquitoes. "Malaria and dengue fever are two of the mosquito-borne diseases most likely to spread dramatically as global temperatures head upward," said the Harvard Medical School's Paul Epstein in Scientific American in 2000, in a warning typical of many.

Carried away by confirmation bias, scientists modeled the future worsening of malaria, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change accepted this as a given. When Paul Reiter, an expert on insect-borne diseases at the Pasteur Institute, begged to differ—pointing out that malaria's range was shrinking and was limited by factors other than temperature—he had an uphill struggle. "After much effort and many fruitless discussions," he said, "I…resigned from the IPCC project [but] found that my name was still listed. I requested its removal, but was told it would remain because 'I had contributed.' It was only after strong insistence that I succeeded in having it removed."

Yet Dr. Reiter has now been vindicated. In a recent paper, Peter Gething of Oxford University and his colleagues concluded that widespread claims that rising mean temperatures had already worsened malaria mortality were "largely at odds with observed decreasing global trends" and that proposed future effects of rising temperatures are "up to two orders of magnitude smaller than those that can be achieved by the effective scale-up of key control measures."

[ *gasp* the models were wrong? ]