If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   Well, if nothing else, Obamacare is creating jobs-for lawyers coming up with new and increasingly ridiculous ways to challenge it   (politico.com) divider line 51
    More: Asinine, obamacare, ACA, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Alabama Republican, human beings, Douglas W. Elmendorf, Health Affairs, John Shimkus  
•       •       •

1503 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Dec 2012 at 5:18 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-07 05:20:59 PM
What about freedom of conscience? I just don't get way statist hate the constitution.
 
2012-12-07 05:25:42 PM
Except it's a uniform tax on everyone, and a tax credit if they get insurance. That's the way it's been structured since day one, not something Roberts "created".

And this has nothing to do with Medicaid. It's about eligble health insurance coverage, which is uniformly available. Yes, every state has different availabilities here. Because the states regulate health insurance and it's requirements. By that amendment people keep talking about but not understanding...
 
2012-12-07 05:26:05 PM

lockers: What about freedom of conscience? I just don't get way statist hate the constitution.


You "just don't get way statist hate the constitution" huh?

What a well reasoned opinion.
 
2012-12-07 05:30:32 PM

lockers: What about freedom of conscience? I just don't get way statist hate the constitution.


That's not in the Constitution.
 
2012-12-07 05:32:27 PM
We will get to single payer one way or the other. it's time to divorce health care from employment. A mobile labor market would be a good thing.

Also, is that public option via the railway postal workers plan thingy still gonna be an option once the exchanges get set up?
 
2012-12-07 05:38:22 PM
Huh, so we should just shut up and accept laws without question or challenge? Right. Let me mark that one down.

There is a reason the Supreme Court exists, you know. It was anticipated that citizens would need to have the right to challenge the constitutionality of laws passed so that no one branch of the government could have too much power.

Sorry if you don't like that.
 
2012-12-07 05:41:31 PM
Anti-ACA Masterminds?

LOL
 
2012-12-07 05:43:36 PM

k1j2b3: Huh, so we should just shut up and accept laws without question or challenge? Right. Let me mark that one down.


Yup. Put one in the Potato column.
 
2012-12-07 05:49:02 PM
I tried to shop for a new health insurance plan last month. Too old and too many preexisting conditions, they tell me. So sorry.

I can't WAIT for 2014.
 
2012-12-07 05:56:09 PM

k1j2b3: Huh, so we should just shut up and accept laws without question or challenge? Right. Let me mark that one down.

There is a reason the Supreme Court exists, you know. It was anticipated that citizens would need to have the right to challenge the constitutionality of laws passed so that no one branch of the government could have too much power.

Sorry if you don't like that.


Seems like it's already been challenged a half dozen times. All they're doing is wasting the government's time and money.

But then, maybe that's the point.
 
2012-12-07 05:58:21 PM
ORLY?
 
2012-12-07 05:59:23 PM
Employers on health care reform: Meh
 
2012-12-07 05:59:39 PM

The Jami Turman Fan Club: k1j2b3: Huh, so we should just shut up and accept laws without question or challenge? Right. Let me mark that one down.

There is a reason the Supreme Court exists, you know. It was anticipated that citizens would need to have the right to challenge the constitutionality of laws passed so that no one branch of the government could have too much power.

Sorry if you don't like that.

Seems like it's already been challenged a half dozen times. All they're doing is wasting the government's time and money.

But then, maybe that's the point.


This latest argument is a real stretch. They're desperate at this point, though, because once 2014 hits, Obamacare is going to become extremely popular. Like third rail popular.
 
2012-12-07 06:01:11 PM

lockers: What about freedom of conscience? I just don't get way statist hate the constitution.


Drunk already? It's only 5pm.
 
2012-12-07 06:06:11 PM
Surely, you must mean "...creating jobs -- for lawyers... ," instead of "...creating jobs-for lawyers...."

/jobs-for is not an adjective, much less a compound adjective.
 
2012-12-07 06:11:42 PM

Marcus Aurelius: This latest argument is a real stretch. They're desperate at this point, though, because once 2014 hits, Obamacare is going to become extremely popular. Like third rail popular.


I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?
 
2012-12-07 06:15:36 PM

jigger: I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?


No, you're right. People hate the fact that they can no longer be denied due to pre-existing conditions. They are begging to go back to life-time caps on benefits.
 
2012-12-07 06:20:19 PM

ex0du5: Except it's a uniform tax on everyone, and a tax credit if they get insurance. That's the way it's been structured since day one, not something Roberts "created".

And this has nothing to do with Medicaid. It's about eligble health insurance coverage, which is uniformly available. Yes, every state has different availabilities here. Because the states regulate health insurance and it's requirements. By that amendment people keep talking about but not understanding...


Their argument is that poor people in some states will have shiattier healthcare options because their state legislatures are purposely not taking the modification to Medicare, and since some people will be less capable of getting low income coverage than others in the same boat having a requirement to get coverage is unconstitutional.

...which is still a really stupid argument. People have different situations when deciding to pursue tax credits or not, does that mean that if one state had a tax credit for the same thing as the federal credit and another state did not that it would be unconstitutional for the US government to offer that credit at all?
 
2012-12-07 06:25:28 PM

k1j2b3: Huh, so we should just shut up and accept laws without question or challenge? Right. Let me mark that one down


Once you've failed a test (I'm assuming you're in 9th grade, here) does your teacher let you continue to retake it (different test on the same subject each time) until you pass? 

No, because that would waste time and money.
 
2012-12-07 06:28:23 PM

jigger: Marcus Aurelius: This latest argument is a real stretch. They're desperate at this point, though, because once 2014 hits, Obamacare is going to become extremely popular. Like third rail popular.

I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?


Try buying health insurance in the private market with a preexisting condition. I triple dog dare you.
 
2012-12-07 06:32:24 PM

Soup4Bonnie: jigger: I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?

No, you're right. People hate the fact that they can no longer be denied due to pre-existing conditions. They are begging to go back to life-time caps on benefits.


Yeah, people like all the good bits, but didn't like the mandate.

Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

I think I remember someone in an older thread say that a lot of the country changed its mind to approving or at least accepting after SCOTUS ruled.
 
2012-12-07 06:32:41 PM

Soup4Bonnie: jigger: I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?

No, you're right. People hate the fact that they can no longer be denied due to pre-existing conditions. They are begging to go back to life-time caps on benefits.


Oh yeah. In 2014 the mandate is going to be third rail popular.

Marcus Aurelius: Try buying health insurance in the private market with a preexisting condition. I triple dog dare you.


You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate. Now you're changing the subject.
 
2012-12-07 06:33:33 PM

meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?


It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.
 
2012-12-07 06:34:37 PM
Remember folks, frivolous lawsuits are a-okay when Republicans file them!
 
2012-12-07 06:35:11 PM

jigger: You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate. Now you're changing the subject


I don't see the word "mandate" anywhere in his prediction. Just the word "Obamacare"
 
2012-12-07 06:36:52 PM

jigger: You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate.


No, he said "Obamacare" as in the whole package. It's a short thread. You could review it quickly.
 
2012-12-07 06:37:12 PM

cameroncrazy1984: jigger: You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate. Now you're changing the subject

I don't see the word "mandate" anywhere in his prediction. Just the word "Obamacare"


Hmm, what happens "once 2014 hits"?

What's TFA about? What's the "latest argument" about?
 
2012-12-07 06:37:51 PM

jigger: meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.


Any law can be viewed as a choice as the article so defines it. Murder? It's a choice not to commit murder or go to prison. But you're perfectly free to pick which one you want.
 
2012-12-07 06:38:38 PM

jigger: meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.


Well, you have the choice of getting health insurance or paying a the tax/fine.

There's your choice.
 
2012-12-07 06:38:49 PM

jigger: cameroncrazy1984: jigger: You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate. Now you're changing the subject

I don't see the word "mandate" anywhere in his prediction. Just the word "Obamacare"

Hmm, what happens "once 2014 hits"?

What's TFA about? What's the "latest argument" about?


The mandate isn't the only thing that hits in 2014, genius.
 
2012-12-07 06:39:29 PM

Baz744: jigger: meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.

Any law can be viewed as a choice as the article so defines it. Murder? It's a choice not to commit murder or go to prison. But you're perfectly free to pick which one you want.


That's why Roberts' ruling is shiat.
 
2012-12-07 06:40:20 PM

jigger: Baz744: jigger: meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.

Any law can be viewed as a choice as the article so defines it. Murder? It's a choice not to commit murder or go to prison. But you're perfectly free to pick which one you want.

That's why Roberts' ruling is shiat.


That like, just his opinion, man
 
2012-12-07 06:43:26 PM

cameroncrazy1984: The mandate isn't the only thing that hits in 2014, genius.


The mandate will be the only thing actually going into effect in 2014. If you think those exchanges are going to be up and running in a year, you're dreaming. Even when those nightmares come online, oh yeah, they're going to be really popular.
 
2012-12-07 06:44:11 PM

meat0918: That like, just his opinion, man


His poorly reasoned, illogical opinion.
 
2012-12-07 06:44:37 PM

jigger: Even when those nightmares come online, oh yeah, they're going to be really popular.



I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?
 
2012-12-07 06:46:50 PM

jigger: Baz744: jigger: meat0918: Anyone got an up-to-date survey results since the mandate was ruled constitutional?

It's not a mandate. Didn't you RTFA? It's a choice.

Any law can be viewed as a choice as the article so defines it. Murder? It's a choice not to commit murder or go to prison. But you're perfectly free to pick which one you want.

That's why Roberts' ruling is shiat.


A tax is a mandate, numnutz. The ruling didn't turn in the least on whether or not what Congress did was enact a mandate. It turned on whether or not any constitutional provision permitted the mandate Congress enacted.
 
2012-12-07 06:47:42 PM

jigger: If you think those exchanges are going to be up and running in a year, you're dreaming. Even when those nightmares come online, oh yeah, they're going to be really popula


Citation needed, please. For either issue.
 
2012-12-07 06:50:36 PM

jigger: Soup4Bonnie: jigger: I like when people talk like this. Got any statisticals?

No, you're right. People hate the fact that they can no longer be denied due to pre-existing conditions. They are begging to go back to life-time caps on benefits.

Oh yeah. In 2014 the mandate is going to be third rail popular.

Marcus Aurelius: Try buying health insurance in the private market with a preexisting condition. I triple dog dare you.

You made a prediction about the popularity of the mandate. Now you're changing the subject.


Well let me tell you the whole idea is pretty popular around here, pal. Ask anyone that's self-employed or starting a small business.
 
2012-12-07 07:07:15 PM

jigger: meat0918: That like, just his opinion, man

His poorly reasoned, illogical opinion.


jigger: cameroncrazy1984: The mandate isn't the only thing that hits in 2014, genius.

The mandate will be the only thing actually going into effect in 2014. If you think those exchanges are going to be up and running in a year, you're dreaming. Even when those nightmares come online, oh yeah, they're going to be really popular.


Oregon's will be up and running next year, and is already being hailed as a (potential) model for other states.

It's not our fault certain states dug their heels in and screamed no until the ruling, then begged for (and received) extensions on putting together plans.
 
2012-12-07 07:23:23 PM
We're in the second inning of a nine-inning game. Too soon to predict whether fans will cheer or boo at the end.
 
2012-12-07 07:26:59 PM

BarkingUnicorn: We're in the second inning of a nine-inning game. Too soon to predict whether fans will cheer or boo at the end.


Keep f*cking that chicken.
 
2012-12-07 07:35:04 PM

Baz744: A tax is a mandate, numnutz.


No no. A tax is a choice between paying the tax or being prosecuted. You really need to read the article.

meat0918: Oregon's will be up and running next year


And that's a fine prediction. We'll have to see.

meat0918: It's not our fault certain states dug their heels in and screamed no until the ruling, then begged for (and received) extensions on putting together plans.


A good 20 (give or take) states are just going to pass on it. And that leaves it up to the feds, which raises the question of whether or not they can handle it and how much it will cost. From what I've read on the subject, it's not looking so good on that front. If states want the exchanges to fail, they'll leave it to the feds and it'll be a clusterfark of amazing proportions.
 
2012-12-07 07:46:19 PM

BarkingUnicorn: We're in the second inning of a nine-inning game. Too soon to predict whether fans will cheer or boo at the end.


More like the 8th inning of a blowout.
 
2012-12-07 07:50:27 PM

jigger: From what I've read on the subject, it's not looking so good on that front. If states want the exchanges to fail, they'll leave it to the feds and it'll be a clusterfark of amazing proportions.


Odd. This information doesn't look so cluster-y. (.pdf warning)
 
2012-12-07 08:05:28 PM

jigger: Baz744: A tax is a mandate, numnutz.

No no. A tax is a choice between paying the tax or being prosecuted. You really need to read the article.

meat0918: Oregon's will be up and running next year

And that's a fine prediction. We'll have to see.

meat0918: It's not our fault certain states dug their heels in and screamed no until the ruling, then begged for (and received) extensions on putting together plans.

A good 20 (give or take) states are just going to pass on it. And that leaves it up to the feds, which raises the question of whether or not they can handle it and how much it will cost. From what I've read on the subject, it's not looking so good on that front. If states want the exchanges to fail, they'll leave it to the feds and it'll be a clusterfark of amazing proportions.


If the feds are so farking completely incapable of doing anything right, I propose the federal government gets out of the business of war.
 
2012-12-07 09:52:34 PM

jigger: Baz744: A tax is a mandate, numnutz.

No no. A tax is a choice between paying the tax or being prosecuted. You really need to read the article.

meat0918: Oregon's will be up and running next year

And that's a fine prediction. We'll have to see.

meat0918: It's not our fault certain states dug their heels in and screamed no until the ruling, then begged for (and received) extensions on putting together plans.

A good 20 (give or take) states are just going to pass on it. And that leaves it up to the feds, which raises the question of whether or not they can handle it and how much it will cost. From what I've read on the subject, it's not looking so good on that front. If states want the exchanges to fail, they'll leave it to the feds and it'll be a clusterfark of amazing proportions.


I know everyone is tired of the notion of Obama playing chess, but the truth is that Obama originally wanted a federal exchange and the state exchange structure was a compromise with Blue Dog Senate Dems. All that Sebelius has to do is create a single exchange structure and then make 20 or so state level copies of it. The Republican legislatures and governors are in fact handing Obama a far more liberal structure than he was able to get through Congress.
 
2012-12-07 10:15:54 PM
People have been arguing for some sort of national health insurance coverage since as early as 1919.

Bishops' Program for Social Reconstruction
Link

Since that time, I wonder how much money has been spent on lawsuits and propaganda campaigns by people who are determined to make sure it never happens. . .
 
2012-12-07 11:02:32 PM

jigger: No no. A tax is a choice between paying the tax or being prosecuted. You really need to read the article.


What's maybe most ironic about your manifest ignorance here is that the Obamacare tax, at this time, is not a choice between paying the tax or being prosecuted. PPACA specifies that criminal prosecution is not available as a penalty for non-payment. At this time, the IRS is pretty much limited to withholding tax refunds from the scofflaws.
 
2012-12-08 10:19:41 AM
(This comment has been removed)
 
2012-12-08 03:14:55 PM

wongway: Nannycare

just don't get old, or get Cancer.

Otherwise it is OK


Yeah, corporate nanny care: don't get sick! I agree, the US health care system needed this.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report