The Glade 4.0

Building relationships is the most important lesson you will ever learn in your work life. I have had 3 full time position, 2 of which I received because of the relationship I built. (One from the first job, and one from a un-paid intern position which lasted 6 weeks). Unfortunately the fact that most interns cannot recognise the type of rewards they can achieve, does not mean there are no rewards. Opportunities avail themselves to those who recognise it for a reason, it’s Darwinism at its best.

Interning is not school, you don’t get fed, you have to seek out the knowledge. It’s not the employer’s duty to hold the intern’s hand. Once you graduate, that’s it, you’re a big boy/girl now, sink or swim.

Fixing up a power-point is probably one of the best things you could hope for. You see the type of presentation, the necessary information that goes into it, the amount of fluff required, level of verbiage used, and what is important enough for your boss to be putting into the presentation. Just because an intern is too stupid to read what he’s “pretty-upping” does not make the task menial.

As an intern you should also be actively aware of the type of filing/fixing upping/coffee runs you’re doing, and actively lookout for those processes you can improve. Instead, most interns take the “teach me” approach and wait for things to be handed to them.

Arathain:

Entry-level tasks and knowledge are almost always menial. You seem to think menial is solely the province of gofers, but that's not actually the case. Cataloging and filing paperwork is menial, but that doesn't mean the 6 week long project isn't useful or beneficial to the intern. Processing receipts on a loading dock is menial, but a damn sight more valuable than looking over the books with a CPA when it comes to understanding the bottom line. Interns do menial work primarily because of all the legal obligations and encumbrances on meaningful work.

Being the "coffee fetcher" as it were is generally just a totem-pole factor in many corporate cultures.

Of course, and there's nothing wrong with that, but I do think these sorts of activities should be minimized with unpaid interns. Something about someone donating their time to bring me coffee makes me uncomfortable.

Obamacare Will Collect and Share Americans' Data 'Without the Consent of the Individual'

J.D. Tuccille|Jun. 25, 2013 1:27 pm



U.S. GovernmentIf you were starting to fret that the National Security Agency was the only government body that cared enough to stalk you, fret not! It turns out that the concerned folks slapping together Obamacare exchanges plan to hoover up your personal information in something called a Data Services Hub in order to determine your privileges and exemptions under the new government health care regime. Even better, officials intend to share your data with federal and state agencies, private contractors and consultants, explicitly without asking for your leave to do so.

John Merline of Investors Business Daily reports:


The Health and Human Services Department earlier this year exposed just how vast the government's data collection efforts will be on millions of Americans as a result of ObamaCare.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., asked HHS to provide "a complete list of agencies that will interact with the Federal Data Services Hub." The Hub is a central feature of ObamaCare, since it will be used by the new insurance exchanges to determine eligibility for benefits, exemptions from the federal mandate, and how much to grant in federal insurance subsidies.

In response, the HHS said the ObamaCare data hub will "interact" with seven other federal agencies: Social Security Administration, the IRS, the Department of Homeland Security, the Veterans Administration, Office of Personnel Management, the Department of Defense and — believe it or not — the Peace Corps. Plus the Hub will plug into state Medicaid databases.

And what sort of data will be "routed through" the Hub? Social Security numbers, income, family size, citizenship and immigration status, incarceration status, and enrollment status in other health plans, according to the HHS.

The Center for Consumer Information & Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services provides some reassurances for those concerned by such concentration of personal information.


For all marketplaces, CMS is also building a tool called the Data Services Hub to help with verifying applicant information used to determine eligibility for enrollment in qualified health plans and insurance affordability programs. The hub will provide one connection to the common federal data sources (including but not limited to SSA, IRS, DHS) needed to verify consumer application information for income, citizenship, immigration status, access to minimum essential coverage, etc. CMS has completed the technical design, and reference architecture for this work, is establishing a cross-agency security framework as well as the protocols for connectivity, and has begun testing the hub. The hub will not store consumer information, but will securely transmit data between state and federal systems to verify consumer application information. Protecting the privacy of individuals remains the highest priority of CMS.

No stored consumer information? Privacy is the "highest priority"? Well, that's all right, then. Except ... Damn it. Government agencies often say one thing publicly, and quite aother privately. Merline points out that the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services portrayed the Data Services Hub in a somewhat different light in an obscure regulatory notice filed on February 6, 2013:


In accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, CMS is establishing a new system of records titled, ``Health Insurance Exchanges (HIX) Program,'' to support the CMS Health Insurance Exchanges Program established under provisions of the Affordable Care Act (PPACA) ... The system of records will contain personally identifiable information (PII) about certain individuals who apply or on whose behalf an application is filed for eligibility determinations for enrollment in a qualified health plan (QHP) through an Exchange, and for insurance affordability programs.

So, the database "will contain personally identifiable information" after all. And just how "highest priority" is the privacy of the stored data?

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE SYSTEM
A. Entities Who May Receive Disclosures Under Routine Use

These routine uses specify circumstances, in addition to those provided by statute in the Privacy Act of 1974, under which CMS may release information from the HIX without the consent of the individual to whom such information pertains. ...

Among the listed "entities who may receive disclosures under routine use" without your consent are federal agencies, state agencies, agency contractors, consultants, CMS grantees and non-profit entities operating exchanges for states.

Those are just the entities authorized to have access to your information, As we know, employees of government agencies from local police departments to the Internal Revenue Service have a history of misusing databases for fun and profit.

Well looks like some of the effects of Obama care has been put off for another year, a favor for congresional Democrats?

In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin

I fail to see how. The message is employers don't need to provide insurance this year, but individuals have to buy it or pay the tax. So they are forcing the middle class to buy healthcare without a public or private subsidy.

U.S. relaxes health law income, insurance status rule for exchanges
By David Morgan
422 words
7 July 2013
20:28


Reuters News
LBA
English
(c) 2013 Reuters Limited


WASHINGTON, July 7 (Reuters) - Days after delaying health insurance requirements for employers, the Obama administration has decided to roll back requirements for new state online insurance marketplaces to verify the income and health coverage status of people who apply for subsidized coverage.

President Barack Obama's healthcare reform law is slated to begin offering health coverage through state marketplaces, or exchanges, beginning Oct. 1. But to receive tax subsidies to help buy insurance, enrollees must have incomes ranging from 100 percent to 400 percent of the federal poverty line and not have access to affordable insurance through an employer.

Until now, the administration had proposed that exchanges verify whether new applicants receive employer-sponsored insurance benefits through random checks. It also sought to require marketplaces to verify each enrollee's income status.

But final regulations released quietly on Friday by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) give 16 states and the District of Columbia, which are setting up their own exchanges, until 2015 to begin random sampling of enrollees' employer-insurance status. The rules also allow only random - rather than comprehensive - checks on income eligibility in 2014.

The changes, which point to new technical and bureaucratic challenges at the state and federal levels, raise new questions about the how successfully Obama's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will be implemented. The law is scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1. But the administration's latest move acknowledges that exchanges need extra time to get their verification systems in place.

Less than a week ago, the administration also announced that it would not require employers with 50 workers or more to provide insurance benefits until 2015, a one-year delay that stirred speculation about the possibility of further delays.

The regulations, contained in a 606-page HHS rule, allowed state-run exchanges to accept an enrollee's "attestation regarding enrollment in an eligible employer-sponsored plan." Marketplaces to be operated by the federal government in 34 states will still make random checks to verify applicant insurance status in 2014, it said.

"For income verification, for the first year of operations, we are providing (state and federal) exchanges with temporarily expanded discretion to accept an attestation of projected annual household income without further verification," the rule said. (Editing by Eric Walsh)

In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin

So does that mean I can get the credits without buying the insurance?

For Fatburger and others, Obamacare delay came too late
By Jose Pagliery @Jose_Pagliery July 8, 2013: 9:29 AM ET

7
Email Print

fatburger andy weiderhorn

Businesses are glad the Obamacare employer mandate got delayed to 2015. But the fact that the delay didn't come sooner cost Fatburger CEO Andy Wiederhorn more than $30,000.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
Delaying the Obamacare employer mandate has simply put off rules business had already started adjusting to.

Under the Affordable Care Act, companies with 50-plus full-time employees must start offering them health insurance or face stiff penalties. The employer mandate had been set to kick in January 2014, but was pushed back a year.

Because a 30-hour work week counts as full-time under Obamacare, Fatburger fast-food restaurants had started cutting worker hours below that threshold, CEO Andy Wiederhorn said.

Some Fatburger owners even began "job sharing" with other businesses, teaming up to share a higher number of employees all working fewer hours. Someone could work 25 hours at one Fatburger, 25 at another one with a different franchise owner, and still not be a full-time worker under Obamacare rules.

Related: Delay in Obamacare - what you need to know

Many companies at the International Franchise Expo in New York City last month acknowledged they've been adopting that slash-and-share method, cutting hours and splitting workers.

For them, the White House decision to delay implementation doesn't change much: Small business owners who undo those changes will simply have to redo them next year.

"All it's doing is causing confusion, anxiety and the workers are paying the price," Wiederhorn said. "Now, the mandate's a moving target. It's very, very challenging."

At Wiederhorn's second company, Buffalo's Cafe chicken wing restaurants, he had already given up $30,000 as a result of the employer mandate.

One owner of several Buffalo's Cafe franchises in Georgia planned to close one of his restaurants to get below the 50-employee mark. In response, Wiederhorn reduced the royalty fee his corporation charges franchisees.

Wiederhorn could have waited a year before making the move.

"I'm definitely getting the short end of the stick," he said. "We gave them the concession to save the jobs. And now the law's been delayed. We feel like we have whiplash here."
How much has health reform helped Medicare?
How much has health reform helped Medicare?

The employer mandate remains unpopular with most small business owners. Although it applies to only 3% of the nation's 5.7 million employers, the vast majority of whom already provide insurance, the rule is seen as burdensome and confusing.

Many small business owners hope the delay is merely a step toward eliminating the employer mandate entirely.

Mike Johnson is another Buffalo's Cafe franchisee who owns four restaurants near Atlanta, Ga. He has no plans to reduce workers' hours to avoid the mandate. Those covered under his insurance plan will jump from 12 employees to perhaps 70. Even if some of them turn down the offer, he projects his yearly health insurance premiums will go from $60,000 to more than $200,000.

That would cut his profits in half, he said.

Related: Question about Obamacare? Call this number

"I've been worried nearly sick about it," Johnson said. "This gives me another year to look at all the options, and lets the politicians talk about what the best course of action would be."

Johnson hopes that includes a repeal of the employer mandate. He argues that health care reform will be sufficient enough with the other provisions.

"The employer mandate never made any sense to anybody, especially to struggling small businesses," he said.

America no longer world’s fattest developed nation, UN report says

We did it, America!

According to a new report from the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, the United States is no longer the world's fattest developed nation―Mexico is.

Nearly a third of Mexican adults (32.8 percent) are considered obese—people aged 20 and older whose body mass index (BMI) is 30 and above. That edges out the United States, where 31.8 percent of American adults are considered obese.

Syria at 31.6 percent, is the third fattest among developed countries, while Venezuela and Libya are tied for fourth at 30.8 percent.

Mexico's urban lifestyle and rising income levels coupled with malnourishment among the country's poor have helped it claim this unhealthy title.

“The same people who are malnourished are the ones who are becoming obese,” Abelardo Avila, a physician with Mexico's National Nutrition Institute, told the Global Post. “In the poor classes we have obese parents and malnourished children. The worst thing is the children are becoming programmed for obesity. It's a very serious epidemic.”

Diabetes kills an estimated 70,000 people a year in Mexico—"or roughly equal to the deaths authorities say are caused by more than six years of the country's gangland wars," the Post noted.

About 12 percent of the world's total population is obese, according to the U.N. report.

The world's fattest nation overall is Nauru, a South Pacific island where a staggering 71.1 percent of its 10,000 inhabitants are obese.

The U.N. report does not include data for American Samoa, which has been tabbed in the past as the world's fattest country. According to a 2010 World Health Organization report, nearly all of that Pacific island's inhabitants (95 percent) are considered overweight.

On the other end of the scale is Japan, the thinnest developed country. Just 4.5 of Japanese adults are considered obese, the U.N. says.

In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin

In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin

Obamacare Loophole Could Leave Doctors Holding the Bag for Unpaid Claims
J.D. Tuccille|Jul. 22, 2013 7:43 pm



US GovernmentI thought I'd lost my mind when I read a news reference to a three-month grace period health insurers must provide to customers who buy coverage through Obamacare exchanges and then don't pay premiums, but which could leave providers uncompensated for services rendered during the last two months of that grace period. As it turns out, though, I'm not the one who lost his mind — that honor belongs to the authors of the Affordable Care Act. Yes, the law really does require that insurers must keep deadbeats on their rolls for three months, but that they only have to pay claims submitted during the first month.

The Advisory Board, a research firm specializing in health care and higher education, has the details:


The loophole: A grace period for exchange purchasers

Under the final rules, qualifying health plans must offer a three month grace period to enrollees who receive advance payments for premium tax credit (offered to low-income enrollees in order to reduce out-of-pocket exchange costs) and miss a monthly premium payment. This will enhance continuity of care for those who cannot afford premiums for certain months due to job loss or other financial constraints.

Financial responsibility falls to providers

Qualified health plans are required to pay all claims in the first month of the grace period but can pend claims made in the second and third months, at which point the patient must pay either the claim or their exchange premium. If they cannot afford the payment, then claims during this second and third month can go uncompensated.

So what does this mean? Patients with unpaid claims face a tax penalty but are not charged with a rate increase, issued a repayment order, or even banned from participating in another exchange. In essence, enrollees can jump from one exchange plan to the next every four months—and still receive full health coverage.

If you're thinking that a consulting firm might just try to scare customers and potential customers, here's a similar write-up from a Summary of Final Rule on Establishment of Exchanges and Standards for Qualified Health Plans (PDF) from America's Health Insurance Plans, a trade organization. AHIP presents the rule as a victory, since earlier versions would have put them on the hook for all claims during that grace period.


Grace period for non-payment of premiums by individuals receiving advance payments of the premium tax credit. Under the final rules, qualified health plans must provide a grace period of three consecutive months if an enrollee receiving advance payments of the premium tax credit previously paid at least one month’s premium during the benefit year, consist ent with the proposed rules. However, the final rule requires qualified health plans to pay all appropriate claims during the first month of the grace period, but may pend claims in the second and third months of the grace period. The proposed rules would have required qualified health plans to pay all appropriate claims during the three month grace period.

A casual survey of available health care providers — I told my wife in between patient appointments — elicited a truly impressive string of profanity. No wonder, since the Advisory Board points out, "The loophole could take a serious toll on provider collections. Physicians may be left paying for a patients’ treatment during months two and three of the grace period, causing an uptick in bad debt collections."

Not too surprisingly, the Advisory Board suggests that small practices might want to consider refusing exchange plans, if they can, so that they don't, you know, go broke.

Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.

Who still supports the ACA in part or full?

(1) The pre-ACA system was massively inefficient and left far too many people without adequate access to healthcare.

(2) The ACA was pretty much the only reform package that was politically possible at the time.

(3) Although many changes and tweaks will be needed to make it truly workable in the long run, it will be possible to make those changes gradually and end up with a more efficient, more universal system.

(4) However, even if all the needed changes and tweaks are eventually implemented, the ACA should still never have been adopted in the first place because the individual mandate, which is crucial to its existence, was (in my opinion and contra that of the USSC) an unconstitutional overreach.

Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.

(2) The ACA was pretty much the only reform package that was politically possible at the time.