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.

(Huffington Post)   House GOP: "How about this, Debt Ceiling Lift for Obamacare delay?" Senate Dem: "No, revise it. Be serious." House GOP: "How about this, Debt Ceiling Lift for Obamacare delay?" USA:"fark you"   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 407
    More: Sad, House GOP, obamacare, GOP, Van Hollen, Majority Leader Harry Reid, individual mandate, ACA, Boehner  
•       •       •

2727 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 Sep 2013 at 7:12 PM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



407 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-30 05:10:55 PM
I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.
 
2013-09-30 05:15:52 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


What is the compromise for the House there? All they want to do is delay Obamacare. They want to raise the debt ceiling. They want everything else. Why give the House everything they want?
 
2013-09-30 05:18:24 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


As we've said a million times, it's ridiculous to suggest that this is something to compromise on. The house says "Either you agree to delay Obamacare or we shut down the government."

That's it.

Tell me how this places a requirement on the Democrats to compromise. Go on. Explain why "Either do what we say or we'll shut down the government" is somehow a position that puts a positive obligation on the Democrats to do something. And then qualitatively differentiate this from "Either give me $1,000,000 or I'll shoot the hostages."
 
2013-09-30 05:18:38 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.
 
2013-09-30 05:19:33 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


That's dumb.

The Republicans are attempting to extort enormous concessions in return for funding the government for 90 days. That is absurd on its face. It would be like the Democrats using the threat of a government shutdown in order to require mandatory licensing and registration for firearms in return for funding the government for 90 days.

It's crass. It's not an equivocal negotiation. And the press has done an enormous disservice to the public by not reporting this realistically.
 
2013-09-30 05:20:43 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


 photos.imageevent.com
 
2013-09-30 05:20:58 PM

Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.


If he doesn't at least pay for 1 month, he's being a complete absolutist. How dare he? It's his duty to compromise.
 
2013-09-30 05:24:46 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


Other than the Senate saying they would agree to a 6 week extension. I can see how you would ignore that part.
 
2013-09-30 05:25:10 PM
In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2013-09-30 05:26:37 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


Why should anyone, much less the US government, negotiate with terrorists?
 
2013-09-30 05:28:06 PM
Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.
 
2013-09-30 05:28:32 PM

birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.


Right. I guess it does make sense to negotiate with the man holding the bomb. After all, you don't want the bomb to go off.

But if the bomb does go off, you really can only blame the man with the, not the people who didn't negotiate with him.
 
2013-09-30 05:31:58 PM

DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.


This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.
 
2013-09-30 05:33:45 PM

birdmanesq: This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.


That's fair enough. The contraception thing, for example, had no place coming up - there's a reason Obama led with it today. That being said though, I don't think "fund X, Y but not Z" is an inherently worse argument than "fund X, Y and Z simply because those programs were funded last time". The problem with the GOP here isn't that they are negotiating over the budget, but that (i) they aren't negotiating at all and (ii) their substantive positions are absurd.
 
2013-09-30 05:36:07 PM
The Senate should send it back with one addition - agree to delay only the individual mandate for a year, but with rate freezes on all insurance policies so that the companies don't use it as an excuse to jack up premiums, and in exchange for that the GOP agrees to support legislation eliminating the need for a vote over the debt ceiling forevermore, it will just increase automatically by the needed amount from here out.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-09-30 05:38:51 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


Yes, because they aren't fecking morons and realize that the minority party has forgotten how the constitution works and is trying to repeal a law that had already been enacted, despite the fact that they don't have enough votes to pass a bill, much less override a veto.

Not to mention that the constitution requires that the debt of the USA be honored, which the house is refusing to do.  The reason that Republicans are making so many bogus claims about the president violating the constitution is that they know they are the only ones violating it.

The problem is that by violating the Constitution, the GOP is going to weaken it.
 
2013-09-30 05:41:12 PM
delay the mandate? sure! it was a republican idea anyway. of course insurance companies will be pissed because they'll now have to cover everyone - even people with preexisting conditions - without the mandate to help pay for it. maybe they'll even get out of the business altogether, leaving us no option but single-payer.

so, sure, johnny boy, we'll give up the mandate!
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-09-30 05:41:45 PM

birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.


Really, it's the duty of the congress to fund the government.  Funding the debit is constitutionally required.  The Congress is already getting their salary, that's all they should get in exchange for doing their job.

This isn't a policy fight.  Obamacare has already passed both houses of congress and been signed into law.  This is simply the house going on strike.
 
2013-09-30 05:47:32 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


It's almost as if 'people' are smarter than you isn't it?
 
2013-09-30 05:50:35 PM

Rincewind53: Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.

If he doesn't at least pay for 1 month, he's being a complete absolutist. How dare he? It's his duty to compromise.


Ok ok, in order to keep the good faith negotiations going, I'll settle for 6 months.  Now that's a compromise!
 
2013-09-30 05:50:40 PM

FlashHarry: it was a republican idea anyway.


This is why you support it?
 
2013-09-30 05:54:44 PM

Carn: Rincewind53: Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.

If he doesn't at least pay for 1 month, he's being a complete absolutist. How dare he? It's his duty to compromise.

Ok ok, in order to keep the good faith negotiations going, I'll settle for 6 months.  Now that's a compromise!


Done. fecking, you now owe Carn six months of TF.
 
2013-09-30 05:58:40 PM
Try actually GIVING SOMETHING UP if you want to get something in return. You're tired of being called extortionists and terrorists, but when your only "offer" is a threat to destroy our banking system and plunge us into a Depression if you don't get what you want, WTF is the country supposed to call you?
 
2013-09-30 06:00:40 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


You can't possibly be this stupid without having some sort of court-appointed guardian. Are they supposed to let you on the internet this time of day?
 
2013-09-30 06:02:16 PM
I was getting an oil change today, and they had Fox News on in the waiting room.  I was surprised at the coverage - they weren't blaming the GOP (of course) but they weren't blaming the Democrats either.  They were actually somewhat sympathetic to the Democrats position and hinted that it was the GOP that was being a bit unreasonable.

They still played it off as mainly a partisan divide without one side being completely wrong, but for Fox News to do that instead of trying to hang this completely around the necks of the Democrats leads me to believe that the dissent amongst the ranks of conservatives is really starting to come to a head over this.
 
2013-09-30 06:02:31 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: it was a republican idea anyway.

This is why you support it?


the mandate? no. i want european-style single-payer health coverage.

but i understand that if you're going to have a market-based solution, which obamacare is, that the mandate is there to offset the hit that insurance companies will take by not being able to deny coverage for preexisting conditions.
 
2013-09-30 06:04:41 PM

FlashHarry: , that the mandate is there to offset the hit that insurance companies will take by not being able to deny coverage for preexisting conditions.


That's not why the mandate is there, actually. It's there to push healthy people onto the exchanges in order to create a larger risk pool and keep premiums down.
 
2013-09-30 06:08:07 PM

FlashHarry: i want european-style single-payer health coverage.


Because?
 
2013-09-30 06:09:51 PM

DamnYankees: FlashHarry: , that the mandate is there to offset the hit that insurance companies will take by not being able to deny coverage for preexisting conditions.

That's not why the mandate is there, actually. It's there to push healthy people onto the exchanges in order to create a larger risk pool and keep premiums down.


Two different ways of saying the same thing.  The insurance companies will lose money taking on 60 year old diabetics with cancer, but they'll make money on healthy 30 year olds.

Since the companies can't charge different rates based on pre-existing conditions through the exchanges, it's the only way to help them keep afloat.

Personally, I don't really care if the health insurance companies stay afloat.  I'd rather see them all go bankrupt and a single payer system put in place.
 
2013-09-30 06:09:52 PM

FlashHarry: a market-based solution, which obamacare is


It is ANYTHING but market based.
 
2013-09-30 06:13:21 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: a market-based solution, which obamacare is

It is ANYTHING but market based.


It's more of a market based system than universal single payer.  Our previous system worked in a very convoluted way compared to the market as well.  There's essentially no price competition between different doctors and hospitals, it's nearly impossible to find out what the prices are for various services to comparison shop, and the prices can differ by huge amounts depending on if you pay cash, pay through an insurance company (and then it differs a lot depending on the insurance company paying), or if you don't pay at all.

It's been convoluted and obfuscated for decades.
 
2013-09-30 06:18:11 PM
Peter King is apparently leading a charge of House Moderates - PETER KING! This guy is now king of the moderates?!?!?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/359969/moderates-revolt-over-cr -j onathan-strong

King wants to pass a clean continuing-resolution bill. "This is going nowhere," he says about the standoff with Senate Democrats. "If Obamacare is as bad as we say it's going to be, then we should pick up a lot of seats in the next election and we should win the presidency in 2016," he says. "This idea of going through the side door to take something you lost through the front door - to me, it's wrong."
 
2013-09-30 06:19:16 PM

DamnYankees: Peter King is apparently leading a charge of House Moderates - PETER KING! This guy is now king of the moderates?!?!?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/359969/moderates-revolt-over-cr -j onathan-strong

King wants to pass a clean continuing-resolution bill. "This is going nowhere," he says about the standoff with Senate Democrats. "If Obamacare is as bad as we say it's going to be, then we should pick up a lot of seats in the next election and we should win the presidency in 2016," he says. "This idea of going through the side door to take something you lost through the front door - to me, it's wrong."


Holy sh*t. That's actually reasonable.
 
2013-09-30 06:23:31 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: i want european-style single-payer health coverage.

Because?


Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for. Like the Army and roads.
 
2013-09-30 06:25:44 PM

what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.


How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?
 
2013-09-30 06:30:57 PM
fark it.

Shoot the Hostage. Let's get this rolling.
 
2013-09-30 06:31:16 PM
No matter how you spin it, the GOP is on the wrong side of this one, even if you don't want Obama Care for whatever reason.
 
2013-09-30 06:31:33 PM
Jonathan Strong @j_strong
GOP member gets phone out, plays Johnny Cash cover of NIN "Hurt" to explain how he feels about current CR strategy


Amazing.
 
2013-09-30 06:34:02 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: a market-based solution, which obamacare is

It is ANYTHING but market based.


You're kidding, right?

It's absolutely market based. It assumes a population-level customer base who will participate for life. But that doesn't make it any less market based.
 
2013-09-30 06:34:21 PM

DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.


How 'Market based' it is depends a lot on the single payer structure.  You could have the NHS route (i.e.: also the same as VA care) where the doctors and staff are public servants, and the facilities are publicly owned.  You could have the Canadian model, with doctors being private and paid, employed, or contracted at standard rates by publicly owned facilities like hospitals, which is a bit more like Medicare.

Anyways, the US already has 4 health care models at work.  My argument isn't whether it's public or private, but whether its efficient.  Single payer is more administratively efficient and leverages economies of scale best.  Whether the doctors or hospitals are for-profit entities is really a function of preference, and isn't the most material factor in whether the system as a whole can be successful.  It's being done successfully with both models today.
 
2013-09-30 06:34:32 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


Everyone should pay into the same pot and it will be divvied out as necessary.  Those who need more care will get it, those who need less will get what they need, but everyone pays in equally (well, based on progressive income brackets).

It won't matter if you're a Fortune 500 CEO or an out of work high school drop out - if you need to see a doctor you get to see a doctor free of charge, and everyone receives the same high quality level of care.

Not only is it a more fair option, it will save us money.  With the government acting as the only insurer, it will be free to mandate rates and reimbursements as necessary to control costs.  A panel of medical experts can update rates for reimbursement to hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and medical equipment companies each year to strike a balance between fair pay for those working in the industry and low costs being charged to the system.

Perhaps even better we could eventually move to just nationalize the entire healthcare industry.  All doctors, nurses, etc, will become government employees paid on a set scale, all pharmaceutical research will be done in government labs for the public good instead of for profit, etc.
 
2013-09-30 06:35:33 PM

birdmanesq: Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: a market-based solution, which obamacare is

It is ANYTHING but market based.

You're kidding, right?

It's absolutely market based. It assumes a population-level customer base who will participate for life. But that doesn't make it any less market based.


Gaah.  Fat fingered.  The above post was meant for you guys.
 
2013-09-30 06:35:36 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my roads?  My police?
 
2013-09-30 06:37:57 PM

DamnYankees: Peter King is apparently leading a charge of House Moderates - PETER KING! This guy is now king of the moderates?!?!?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/359969/moderates-revolt-over-cr -j onathan-strong

King wants to pass a clean continuing-resolution bill. "This is going nowhere," he says about the standoff with Senate Democrats. "If Obamacare is as bad as we say it's going to be, then we should pick up a lot of seats in the next election and we should win the presidency in 2016," he says. "This idea of going through the side door to take something you lost through the front door - to me, it's wrong."


W.T.F. is going on?!?!  A....a...a...Republican(!) said something reasonable?!?!   Wasn't this one of the signs of the end times?

Seriously though, I really thought the Tea Party was going to split the Republican base and destroy that party as we know it by taking such a hard swing to the right.   Seems like the Rank and File republicans are starting to grumble.

Hell, I just found out today that my father, (life long republican) spoke unkindly about the HoR.  I nearly passed out from the shock.


"We need someone perceived by the American people to be irresponsible, untrustworthy, partisan, ambitious and thirsty for the limelight. Am I crazy or is this not a job for the U.S. House of Representatives?"

/Republicans should not look at the way Republicans are portrayed in "The West Wing" as how they should act in real life!
 
2013-09-30 06:39:12 PM

what_now: Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: i want european-style single-payer health coverage.

Because?

Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for. Like the Army and roads.


And schools.

Thinking about healthcare as insurance is already wrong. We should, like every other developed country in the world, have a society where everybody can rely on a basic level of healthcare regardless of their wealth, simply because it is better for each of us for all of us to be well, just as it is better for each of us for all of us to be educated.

And in the same way that I paid for other people's children's education when I was younger, and others are now helping to pay for mine, I should be happy to contribute to other people's health care when I was young and healthy (and by the way, not all young people are healthy) in the knowledge they will help pay for mine when I get old and sick (and by the way, not all old people are sick). This is simply how civilized nations do things.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-09-30 06:40:25 PM

El_Perro: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my roads?  My police?


The same amount you pay for mine?  Or I could be an adult and admit that we both use roads and police and so we should both pay for them.
 
2013-09-30 06:41:22 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


Yes. There is no compromise, budget battles should be about budget, which this is not. The Republicans aren't arguing numbers, they're trying to extort partial repeal of a law they don't like and have lost the battle against, and if you think that they won't try and delay (or repeal) it again over the debt ceiling, and then again when this CR runs out, you're delusional.
 
2013-09-30 06:42:20 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Everyone should pay into the same pot and it will be divvied out as necessary. Those who need more care will get it, those who need less will get what they need, but everyone pays in equally (well, based on progressive income brackets).

It won't matter if you're a Fortune 500 CEO or an out of work high school drop out - if you need to see a doctor you get to see a doctor free of charge, and everyone receives the same high quality level of care.


So with single payer, there are no questions asked. You show up, you're ushered in, you get "the same high quality healhtcare" and you physician gets a check. Let's say that I'm unemployed, overweight, eat unhealthy food, smoke like a chimney, don't wear a seat belt etc etc etc...You feel that you are morally responsible to take care of me no questions asked.

El_Perro: How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my roads? My police?


Well, when I buy thing like gasoline I pay for roads. And police protection is nothing like healthcare so please put that tired argument away.
 
2013-09-30 06:42:37 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


Enough so that when ill-fortune strikes you that you aren't made destitute and holding me up at gunpoint for what's mine.  In exchange, you'll fork over an amount so that you won't have to spend additional money putting bars on your windows and buying another gun.

If you don't view providing base-level services that every human requires to be an obvious point of the social contract, then you're likely not interested in maintaining that contract at all.  Fair enough.  But don't drag the cost to society into the argument without calculating for externalities.

And don't drag freedom into the equation without considering the freedom from fear:  The fear of losing employer-based health benefits, or the fear of bankruptcy from an accident or bad luck.
 
2013-09-30 06:42:43 PM

DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.


You don't negotiate AFTER legislation is passed.
 
2013-09-30 06:43:34 PM

vudutek: You don't negotiate AFTER legislation is passed.


Why not? People negotiate to modify and indeed repeal legislation all the time.
 
2013-09-30 06:43:37 PM

czetie: And schools.


Yeah....central planned education has been a huge success.
 
2013-09-30 06:44:54 PM
I hope we get three more of these threads by midnight.
 
2013-09-30 06:46:46 PM

unyon: And don't drag freedom into the equation without considering the freedom from fear:


I fear my government more than I fear going broke.
 
2013-09-30 06:47:22 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


Just out of curiosity, are you for the repeal of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, SNAP, and food stamps as well?
 
2013-09-30 06:48:01 PM

I_C_Weener: I hope we get three more of these threads by midnight.


Ah! the intelligent discussion to be had!
 
2013-09-30 06:48:24 PM
TuteTibiImperes:Personally, I don't really care if the health insurance companies stay afloat.  I'd rather see them all go bankruptDIAF and a single payer system put in place.

Apparently I dislike them a bit more than you, but I'd still sign up for your newsletter.
 
2013-09-30 06:49:17 PM
Exciting vote in the House right now - this is the first vote where there's a possibility the GOP will crack and it will fail to pass. 11:30 remaining in the vote.
 
2013-09-30 06:49:41 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: TuteTibiImperes: Everyone should pay into the same pot and it will be divvied out as necessary. Those who need more care will get it, those who need less will get what they need, but everyone pays in equally (well, based on progressive income brackets).

It won't matter if you're a Fortune 500 CEO or an out of work high school drop out - if you need to see a doctor you get to see a doctor free of charge, and everyone receives the same high quality level of care.

So with single payer, there are no questions asked. You show up, you're ushered in, you get "the same high quality healhtcare" and you physician gets a check. Let's say that I'm unemployed, overweight, eat unhealthy food, smoke like a chimney, don't wear a seat belt etc etc etc...You feel that you are morally responsible to take care of me no questions asked.


Yes.  Social programs to help promote healthy habits should be pushed, but at the end of the day, if you need medical care, you should get it regardless of personal choices (with a few limited exceptions, if you need a new liver due to alcoholism, you'd need to actually quit drinking first and be subject to random unannounced BAC tests while waiting to make sure you were following through for example).
 
2013-09-30 06:50:55 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


How much do you think I should be forced to pay for our overbloated military?
 
2013-09-30 06:53:37 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


Ah, the old "forced" crybaby argument. Thanks for proving yet again you can't converse like an adult.
 
2013-09-30 06:54:30 PM
Jonathan Karl @jonkarl
NEWS FLASH -- President Obama just spoke to @SpeakerBoehner. Their first conversation since a week ago Friday.
 
2013-09-30 06:55:21 PM

birdmanesq: DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.

This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.


What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?
 
2013-09-30 06:56:29 PM

Coco LaFemme: birdmanesq: DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.

This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.

What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?


Barack sounds vaguely German.  Like Barackwurst.
 
2013-09-30 06:57:43 PM

El_Perro: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my roads?  My police?


It is a cornerstone of republican economist shills that not a single one of them got to the chapter on externalities.
 
2013-09-30 06:58:38 PM

I_C_Weener: Coco LaFemme: birdmanesq: DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.

This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.

What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?

Barack sounds vaguely German.  Like Barackwurst.


And Neville Chamberlain appeased Hitler so that he could realize Bismarck's dream of universal health care.

And we can't have any of that.
 
2013-09-30 06:58:59 PM

vudutek: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?

How much do you think I should be forced to pay for our overbloated military?


Things that D_I_A is currently being forced to pay for:
- Housing relief for low-income families
- Oil subsidies to Exxon
- Agricultural subsidies to Monsanto
- Head Start programs for small children
- Food stamps for low-income families in Detroit
- The janitor whose job it is to clean the toilets at the Statue of Liberty
- Bamboo to feed the pandas at the National Zoo
- Hedge-trimming costs at Arlington National Cemetary
- President Obama's vacations
- My drink two weekends ago, which was paid for by my friend who is a Congressional staffer.

Thanks for the drink,  Dancing_in_Anson! I'll buy you one in return next time we hang.
 
2013-09-30 06:59:08 PM

Coco LaFemme: What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?


No, no, no, Germane you know, like Michael's older brother? I don't know if he can help solve this, but I'm willing to try anything at this point.
 
2013-09-30 07:00:37 PM
RT @AJentleson It's taking the House hours to set up this vote, but it'll only take Senate 15 minutes to reject it.

That's from Harry Reid's communications director.
 
2013-09-30 07:00:39 PM

Tigger: El_Perro: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my roads?  My police?

It is a cornerstone of republican economist shills that not a single one of them got to the chapter on externalities.


Externalities don't exist in the free market.

And, you know, free riders are those who are dependent on welfare.
 
2013-09-30 07:01:21 PM

nmrsnr: ust out of curiosity, are you for the repeal of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, SNAP, and food stamps as well?


I don't have a problem with safety net programs. I think that SS is a farce and after watching how Medicare took care of my Father in the year preceding his death, (after paying into it from it's inception) I'm not a big fan of it either.

TuteTibiImperes: with a few limited exceptions


Who will make those? You?

vudutek: How much do you think I should be forced to pay for our overbloated military?


The military budget need cutting...big time.

mediablitz: Ah, the old "forced" crybaby argument


What happens if you don't follow the law...any law?
 
2013-09-30 07:01:29 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


If you don't get insurance, end up in the emergency room, and don't pay, we're forced to pay anyway. At least this way we end up paying less.
 
2013-09-30 07:02:21 PM

nmrsnr: Coco LaFemme: What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?

No, no, no, Germane you know, like Michael's older brother? I don't know if he can help solve this, but I'm willing to try anything at this point.


He was referencing Smokey and the Bandit.
 
2013-09-30 07:03:29 PM
I think the Republicans will do little to nothing until October 17th approaches - right now, social security will get paid tomorrow. It won't on November 3rd - and then their constituency will rise up on their hoverrounds and squish them flat.
 
2013-09-30 07:03:35 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: unyon: And don't drag freedom into the equation without considering the freedom from fear:

I fear my government more than I fear going broke.


I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you're not suffering from a chronic life threatening illness while having substandard insurance.

img.pandawhale.com
 
2013-09-30 07:03:45 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: What happens if you don't follow the law...any law?


Right now the law is facing you to pay taxes that went directly into buying me a drink two weekends ago.

Were you forced to buy me a drink?
 
2013-09-30 07:03:50 PM

Rincewind53: Things that D_I_A is currently being forced to pay for:
- Housing relief for low-income families
- Oil subsidies to Exxon
- Agricultural subsidies to Monsanto
- Head Start programs for small children
- Food stamps for low-income families in Detroit
- The janitor whose job it is to clean the toilets at the Statue of Liberty
- Bamboo to feed the pandas at the National Zoo
- Hedge-trimming costs at Arlington National Cemetary
- President Obama's vacations
- My drink two weekends ago, which was paid for by my friend who is a Congressional staffer.


And now we're going to add 'free' heathcare for all to that list because it (like everything else you listed) the government has determined to be a moral duty.
 
2013-09-30 07:03:51 PM

I_C_Weener: Coco LaFemme: birdmanesq: DamnYankees: Honestly, I think its valid to do this over a CR. The thing is, if you think about it, a CR is basically saying "we will keep funding the government as it currently exists". Well, there's no particularly reason to see "as it currently exists" as the baseline. The baseline can be anything. In that sense, the GOP does have a right to do this. I think its stupid and bad policy and bad politics, but its fundamentally a valid way to negotiate. I just think they will lose.

The debt ceiling is entirely different, and not in any way a valid negotiating point.

This comes down to a failure to budget--likely an intentional decision to continue to have these negotiating points every 90 days.

And I think that "budget" issues should be differentiated from "policy" issues. So, as disgusted as I was by the Sequester, at least it was germane.

What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?

Barack sounds vaguely German.  Like Barackwurst.


Well, his people are known for their sausages.

i1148.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-30 07:04:04 PM

Mugato: nmrsnr: Coco LaFemme: What do the goddamn Germans have to do with this?

No, no, no, Germane you know, like Michael's older brother? I don't know if he can help solve this, but I'm willing to try anything at this point.

He was referencing Smokey and the Bandit.


Plant-sex, folks. I'm not sure why this is so hard for you morons to understand.
 
2013-09-30 07:04:55 PM
 
2013-09-30 07:05:14 PM

Rincewind53: Dancin_In_Anson: What happens if you don't follow the law...any law?

Right now the law is facing forcingyou to pay taxes that went directly into buying me a drink two weekends ago.

Were you forced to buy me a drink?


FTFM
 
2013-09-30 07:05:28 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: nmrsnr: ust out of curiosity, are you for the repeal of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, WIC, SNAP, and food stamps as well?

I don't have a problem with safety net programs. I think that SS is a farce and after watching how Medicare took care of my Father in the year preceding his death, (after paying into it from it's inception) I'm not a big fan of it either.

TuteTibiImperes: with a few limited exceptions

Who will make those? You?


No, I think the government should appoint a panel of medical professionals to make those decisions.
 
2013-09-30 07:06:55 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: And now we're going to add 'free' heathcare for all to that list because it (like everything else you listed) the government has determined to be a moral duty.


Sure, if you'll admit that adding free healthcare to that list is not qualitatively a different kind of "forcing" than "forcing" you to pay for this little guy's bamboo:
cdn.freelancestar.com
 
2013-09-30 07:07:23 PM
czetie:

Thinking about healthcare as insurance is already wrong. We should, like every other developed country in the world, have a society where everybody can rely on a basic level of healthcare regardless of their wealth, simply because it is better for each of us for all of us to be well, just as it is better for each of us for all of us to be educated.

And in the same way that I paid for other people's children's education when I was younger, and others are now helping to pay for mine, I should be happy to contribute to other people's health care when I was young and healthy (and by the way, not all young people are healthy) in the knowledge they will help pay for mine when I get old and sick (and by the way, not all old people are sick). This is simply how civilized nations do things.


I want to live somewhere with people like you. Let's run away together.
 
2013-09-30 07:07:49 PM

DarwiOdrade: At least this way we end up paying less.


You think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free.*

*Plagiarized from PJ O'Rourke

unyon: I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you're not suffering from a chronic life threatening illness while having substandard insurance.


No, but I've been broke.

Rincewind53: Right now the law is facing you to pay taxes that went directly into buying me a drink two weekends ago.

Were you forced to buy me a drink?


It appears that it's my moral obligation to society.
 
2013-09-30 07:11:18 PM

TuteTibiImperes: No, I think the government should appoint a panel of medical professionals to make those decisions


So you will willingly give control of decisions that affect your healthcare to some panel of professionals. It's ok though, because you live a healthy lifestyle so it really won't affect you in any way...it's the people like that guy over there that will be culled.
 
2013-09-30 07:11:58 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: I fear my government more than I fear going broke.


I seriously doubt that but if so, than start a revolution or GTFU.
 
2013-09-30 07:12:19 PM
I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.
 
2013-09-30 07:12:38 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: It appears that it's my moral obligation to society.


I'd argue that it's your societal, not moral, obligation to pay taxes, and that Congress can then do with those taxes what it pleases, and if you have a problem with that your societal obligation is to attempt to vote them out of office.

The only forcing going on here is in the initial requirement to pay taxes, which you do. You are not more "forced to pay" for anything that those taxes go to. Unless it's a very specific tax that is budgeted only to one specific purpose, like a tax that said "You will pay X percentage of your income and these tax funds will go only to Y government program," which is generally  not how our tax system works and was not part of any debate over a national healthcare system.

So I guess right now you actually  are being forced to pay for other people's healthcare, because you have to pay specific Medicare taxes.
 
2013-09-30 07:13:11 PM

Mugato: I seriously doubt that but if so, than start a revolution or GTFU.


Do whut?
 
2013-09-30 07:13:25 PM

birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.


farking Norwegians, trying to take over our government.
 
2013-09-30 07:15:34 PM

birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.


What? Where'd you find that gem?
 
2013-09-30 07:16:04 PM

Rincewind53: birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.

farking Norwegians, trying to take over our government.


Huh, was not familer with that term, thanks google
 
2013-09-30 07:16:13 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: I don't have a problem with safety net programs.


You should given you started by asking how much you should be forced to pay for someone else's well being. How much should I be forced to pay for your retirement? For Medicare, that's really almost exactly the same question you posed "how much should I be forced to pay for your health care?" especially when you're old and going to be racking up the bills?

Why is being forced to pay okay if you're paying for old people, but not for people with preexisting conditions, or to people just above the poverty line?
 
2013-09-30 07:16:38 PM

WhyteRaven74: birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

What? Where'd you find that gem?


It's in one of the Freeper links above.

Hilariously misused to describe Peter King.
 
2013-09-30 07:16:50 PM

WhyteRaven74: birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

What? Where'd you find that gem?


http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3073107/posts 

According to Special Report, a cadre of Quislings in the House are planning a revolt against not only the conservative majority, but the leadership as well.
No doubt led by Peter King who recently insinuated he was not going to continue playing 'Cruz' game', this group will vote with the rats to block our next volley to the senate, the hardest one yet for them to reject.
We cannot allow this. If you are a Freeper and think your rep might be involved in this treachery, melt the phone lines and fill the inboxes. No insurrection can be afforded at this point. Time to tranquilize the RINOS.
 
2013-09-30 07:16:58 PM

Mugato: He was referencing Smokey and the Bandit.


Ah, it's been like 20 years since I've seen that movie, so I don't feel too bad for missing it.
 
2013-09-30 07:18:33 PM
So what the GOP would kick everyone off of their insurance who signs up tomorrow or got insurance through their parents or though medicare expansion?

Really? It doesn't even make sense. It's too late!
 
2013-09-30 07:19:07 PM

Bschott007: According to Special Report, a cadre of Quislings in the House are planning a revolt against not only the conservative majority, but the leadership as well.
No doubt led by Peter King who recently insinuated he was not going to continue playing 'Cruz' game', this group will vote with the rats to block our next volley to the senate, the hardest one yet for them to reject.


OMG bwahahahahahhahahaha oh dear god, I might read something funnier this week, but I doubt it.
 
2013-09-30 07:20:04 PM

birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.


I heard Michael Savage using it on the radio once. I think he keeps it alive.
 
2013-09-30 07:21:42 PM
If I was Reid I would make a list of things and go. "Ok we will delay the mandate for one year, but we get..."

Watch them fold because they actually don't have a problem with the mandate. They only use that because it's the least popular part of Obamacare.
 
2013-09-30 07:21:58 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


As much as it takes. Healthcare providers have to write-off millions a year due to unpaid ER visits, they pass those costs onto everyone else. You think it actually costs $4k to pick you up in an ambulance?

How about because my kids or my neighbors' kids might go to school with your kids. Or we might go to the same theater, or public sporting event. The more people are able to seek preventative care the fewer major outbreaks we'll have and the healthier the people are around us the less likely we are to get sick. Also the healthier people are the more productive they'll be and the more likely they'll be to have opportunities for advancement. Missing work because your sick and can't afford to see the doctor can have a significant impact on your ability to advance in a career or even complete higher education.

Which means that a healthier population is a more productive population which means that fewer people will NEED as much healthcare which means costs come down for everybody.
 
2013-09-30 07:24:02 PM

Rincewind53: Dancin_In_Anson: And now we're going to add 'free' heathcare for all to that list because it (like everything else you listed) the government has determined to be a moral duty.

Sure, if you'll admit that adding free healthcare to that list is not qualitatively a different kind of "forcing" than "forcing" you to pay for this little guy's bamboo:
[cdn.freelancestar.com image 600x342]


You don't get it.  God wanted Pandas to be extinct.  The zoo ruined God's plan.  Why am I paying for such blasphemy?
 
2013-09-30 07:24:34 PM
cinemafanatic.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-30 07:24:58 PM

Rincewind53: Dancin_In_Anson: It appears that it's my moral obligation to society.

I'd argue that it's your societal, not moral, obligation to pay taxes, and that Congress can then do with those taxes what it pleases, and if you have a problem with that your societal obligation is to attempt to vote them out of office.

The only forcing going on here is in the initial requirement to pay taxes, which you do. You are not more "forced to pay" for anything that those taxes go to. Unless it's a very specific tax that is budgeted only to one specific purpose, like a tax that said "You will pay X percentage of your income and these tax funds will go only to Y government program," which is generally  not how our tax system works and was not part of any debate over a national healthcare system.

So I guess right now you actually  are being forced to pay for other people's healthcare, because you have to pay specific Medicare taxes.


If you were a chick.. i'd totes bang you right now
 
2013-09-30 07:25:00 PM
Well, looks like the revolt failed.   Shutdown, here we come.
 
2013-09-30 07:26:59 PM

birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.


What the fark is a 'Quisling'?

/not going to click an FR link
 
2013-09-30 07:27:53 PM

Bschott007: Well, looks like the revolt failed.   Shutdown, here we come.


Ted Cruz is probably going to have all of those Von Stauffenbergs lined up against a wall out back and unceremoniously shot.
 
2013-09-30 07:28:15 PM

Doktor_Zhivago: If you were a chick.. i'd totes bang you right now


I'll squeeze my moobs together real tight for you.
 
2013-09-30 07:29:04 PM

anfrind: Quisling


People who collaborated with the Axis in WWII
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisling
 
2013-09-30 07:29:19 PM

anfrind: birdmanesq: I didn't realize that 'Quisling' was a thing in Freeper land these days.

That's f*cking hilarious.

What the fark is a 'Quisling'?

/not going to click an FR link


Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian politician who cooperated with the Nazis during WWII and had the very bad luck to have his name be turned into a noun meaning a collaborator with an evil oppressive regime.
 
2013-09-30 07:33:20 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


How about this, you give me all your money and I get to kick you in the nuts every day? No, don't like that? What's your counter proposal? How often would you like to get kicked in the nuts after you give me all your money? Okay, how about this, you give me all your money and you get to get to receive my foot swiftly in your nuts every day. See, I've giving you something as part of the deal, my foot.

Why aren't you negotiating?
 
2013-09-30 07:36:39 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: FlashHarry: i want european-style single-payer health coverage.

Because?


Why do you ask?
 
2013-09-30 07:38:19 PM
Seriously, the guy is actually a f*cking moron. And people respond constantly.
 
2013-09-30 07:39:37 PM

bulldg4life: Seriously, the guy is actually a f*cking moron. And people respond constantly.


I know right? I think, deep down, some people like to be trolled.
 
2013-09-30 07:39:42 PM
I have never been so disgusted by anything in my life. Is healthcare a right? No but I would rather people got their shots and treatment for VD instead of worrying about catching something when I'm out in public.

And if I can get cheaper, better healthcare than my company's policy privately? Great. That's tax deductible.

Guys, conservative means not legislating people's life choices and freedoms. Its not being a Christian literalist.

Next election, I'm voting pro-gun democrat.
 
2013-09-30 07:40:05 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: TuteTibiImperes: No, I think the government should appoint a panel of medical professionals to make those decisions

So you will willingly give control of decisions that affect your healthcare to some panel of professionals. It's ok though, because you live a healthy lifestyle so it really won't affect you in any way...it's the people like that guy over there that will be culled.


They already have protocols and boards to decide who gets transplants.
 
2013-09-30 07:41:29 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: czetie: And schools.

Yeah....central planned education has been a huge success.


The most productive workforce and strongest economy on the planet would suggest that, yes, public education has been a success.
 
2013-09-30 07:41:55 PM
Dancin In Anson is a typical conservative idiot. There is no social contract in their mind. You pay your way, or you die. Because...who-the-fark-knows.

He's a sociopath, basically. Again, like most conservatives.
 
2013-09-30 07:42:42 PM
People railing about death panels don't seem to know how insurance and transplant boards work
 
2013-09-30 07:43:38 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.



Heh... Do you really think anyone is buying this disingenuous crap?
 
2013-09-30 07:43:43 PM
Government shutdown is not that big a deal.
Failure to resolve debt ceiling issue by Oct 17 deadline would be very, very bad.
 
2013-09-30 07:44:58 PM
i25.photobucket.com

We get Obamacare and you get DeLay back?  Deal.
 
2013-09-30 07:45:37 PM

realmolo: Dancin In Anson is a typical conservative idiot. There is no social contract in their mind. You pay your way, or you die. Because...who-the-fark-knows.

He's a sociopath, basically. Again, like most conservatives.


Ah fark. Now the thread will jump 300 posts all from him asking where EXACTLY he said he supports conservatives.

Semantics hair splitting GO.
 
2013-09-30 07:45:54 PM
The Tea Party has so little faith in how the Constitution sets forward for bills becoming law that they are willing to fark over the economy, and hence the US population, in order to force their ideology on the population.

This whole charade is simple one big F**K you to the Founding Fathers, courtesy of the Tea Party.

If Obamacare truly is the nightmare that the GOP has claimed it to be, then the public will soon realize it, the Democrats will be driven from office in shame in 2014 and 2016 and the GOP will be able to roll back everything that the public will soon hate.

It is rather curious that they don't seem to think that that is a realistic scenario, and that speaks volumes.
 
2013-09-30 07:46:15 PM

realmolo: Dancin In Anson is a typical conservative idiot. There is no social contract in their mind. You pay your way, or you die. Because...who-the-fark-knows.

He's a sociopath, basically. Again, like most conservatives.


Generally because most people don't like to feel obligated to people who they don't agree with. But as long as it benefits me and mine, I'm okay with it. Making healthcare cheaper and reducing the chance that I'll get sick is a win win for me. Also sticking it to the bastards at the inscos.
 
2013-09-30 07:47:33 PM

DamnYankees: Jonathan Strong @j_strong
GOP member gets phone out, plays Johnny Cash cover of NIN "Hurt" to explain how he feels about current CR strategy


Amazing.


They should be playing "Closer", to describe what they're dong to the American Public.
 
2013-09-30 07:49:52 PM

Beer cap: Moran is going off


[hero.jpg]
 
2013-09-30 07:51:26 PM
You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.
 
2013-09-30 07:52:58 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.


I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative
 
2013-09-30 07:53:25 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: TuteTibiImperes: No, I think the government should appoint a panel of medical professionals to make those decisions

So you will willingly give control of decisions that affect your healthcare to some panel of professionals. It's ok though, because you live a healthy lifestyle so it really won't affect you in any way...it's the people like that guy over there that will be culled.


And this comment shows how you know nothing about how healthcare insurance has worked since it's inception.  Most decisions that are made at the insurance company are not made by doctors, but by actuarial specialists.  They looked at a cost benefit analysis, and decided whether you would get that lifesaving drug or surgery.

Couple that with the fact that so many insurance companies engaged in rescission (usually trying to find new and interesting ways to deny coverage to someone due to a specious 'pre-existing condition', and add in that many who did it for the companies got huge bonuses based on how many policies they could terminate), yeah, prior to the ACA, everything was just peachy.  But you go right on believing that our healthcare system was the best in the entire world compared to such 3rd world nations like the UK, Canada, and Germany.
 
2013-09-30 07:54:23 PM

Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.


What do I get in return, a continuing resolution to fund the government? OK you've got a deal.
 
2013-09-30 07:54:50 PM

Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative


It's bad because it was done under a Democrat's administration, not a Republican's.
 
2013-09-30 07:56:14 PM

TuteTibiImperes: DamnYankees: FlashHarry: , that the mandate is there to offset the hit that insurance companies will take by not being able to deny coverage for preexisting conditions.

That's not why the mandate is there, actually. It's there to push healthy people onto the exchanges in order to create a larger risk pool and keep premiums down.

Two different ways of saying the same thing.  The insurance companies will lose money taking on 60 year old diabetics with cancer, but they'll make money on healthy 30 year olds.

Since the companies can't charge different rates based on pre-existing conditions through the exchanges, it's the only way to help them keep afloat.

Personally, I don't really care if the health insurance companies stay afloat.  I'd rather see them all go bankrupt and a single payer system put in place.


This is the thing the repubs want to do. Delay the mandate to make insurance rates go crazy high as everyone with expensive healthcare gets onto plans without paying for are existing conditions. Meanwhilethe healthy blow it off. When either premiums go crazy high or companies start going bankrupt the republicans get to say see we told you so while they dont mention that they caused it.
 
2013-09-30 07:57:06 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


The United States does not negotiate with terrorists.
 
2013-09-30 07:58:06 PM

Weatherkiss: It's bad because it was done under a Democrat's administration, not a Republican's.


politicians in the same party steal bills from one another just to feel that warm limelight.
Republicans would drown their mother if they though it would give them political clout.
ultimately, we've (the U.S.) have chosen unwisely as far as elected representatives.
 
2013-09-30 07:58:07 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


A: Enough to keep little poor kids from dying just because they're poor.
 
2013-09-30 07:58:40 PM

birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.


We need a CR. It is obvious that Obamacare is defective as many parts of it have been delayed by Obama himself and other parts repealed - the 1099 for all small business transactions got the chop a few years ago if I recall. It is flawed and delaying that until it can be repaired is not unreasonable.

Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.
 
2013-09-30 07:58:51 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.


You've done far too much shilling for Wall Street. Nobody with more than two brain cells to rub together believes you.
 
2013-09-30 07:59:05 PM

DeArmondVI: The Tea Party has so little faith in how the Constitution sets forward for bills becoming law that they are willing to fark over the economy, and hence the US population, in order to force their ideology on the population.

This whole charade is simple one big F**K you to the Founding Fathers, courtesy of the Tea Party.

If Obamacare truly is the nightmare that the GOP has claimed it to be, then the public will soon realize it, the Democrats will be driven from office in shame in 2014 and 2016 and the GOP will be able to roll back everything that the public will soon hate.

It is rather curious that they don't seem to think that that is a realistic scenario, and that speaks volumes.


I believe that the logical response is "but letting obamacare ruin the country and kill millions would be petty, cruel and evil. We should stop it now rather than play politics".

So they can be consistent on that end, or at least they can try to appear to be.
 
2013-09-30 07:59:47 PM

TV's Vinnie: Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?

A: Enough to keep little poor kids from dying just because they're poor.


I was going to tell him a-buck-O-five.
 
2013-09-30 08:00:16 PM

feckingmorons: Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.

What do I get in return, a continuing resolution to fund the government? OK you've got a deal.


Why do you care about what you get in return? You're clearly just in it for yourself if all you care about is what you get in return. So just give Carn his 1 year of TF and we'll consider what we feel you deserve later.
 
2013-09-30 08:00:46 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.

We need a CR. It is obvious that Obamacare is defective as many parts of it have been delayed by Obama himself and other parts repealed - the 1099 for all small business transactions got the chop a few years ago if I recall. It is flawed and delaying that until it can be repaired is not unreasonable.

Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.


What does that have to do with a CR?
 
2013-09-30 08:01:52 PM

Reminder.

Also for the 1st time I heard a GOP rep (Gingrey) praise "sequester-level" funding in CR itself. Fact it's considered "clean" is a GOP win.

- Suzy Khimm (@SuzyKhimm) September 30, 2013
 
2013-09-30 08:02:09 PM

enry: What does that have to do with a CR?


Nothing. He's trolling.
 
2013-09-30 08:02:50 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.

We need a CR. It is obvious that Obamacare is defective as many parts of it have been delayed by Obama himself and other parts repealed - the 1099 for all small business transactions got the chop a few years ago if I recall. It is flawed and delaying that until it can be repaired is not unreasonable.

Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.


The mandate is a huge part of it and is central to it working. Many flawed parts are being delayed as you noted, so the law can be refined and implemented as cleanly as possible. I don't see any repub ideas to strengthen it, just ideas to tank it.
 
2013-09-30 08:03:16 PM

Isitoveryet: Weatherkiss: It's bad because it was done under a Democrat's administration, not a Republican's.

politicians in the same party steal bills from one another just to feel that warm limelight.
Republicans would drown their mother if they though it would give them political clout.
ultimately, we've (the U.S.) have chosen unwisely as far as elected representatives.


Personally, I think we have the government we deserve. We go through this economic hostage situation every year. Every election year the same assholes keep getting re-elected. Noone recalls their senators or representatives for this kind of bullshiat they pull. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Teahadists are insane. We elect insane people to congress.

Yep. This is working exactly as intended and we get the government we deserve.
 
2013-09-30 08:03:44 PM

tomcatadam: DeArmondVI: The Tea Party has so little faith in how the Constitution sets forward for bills becoming law that they are willing to fark over the economy, and hence the US population, in order to force their ideology on the population.

This whole charade is simple one big F**K you to the Founding Fathers, courtesy of the Tea Party.

If Obamacare truly is the nightmare that the GOP has claimed it to be, then the public will soon realize it, the Democrats will be driven from office in shame in 2014 and 2016 and the GOP will be able to roll back everything that the public will soon hate.

It is rather curious that they don't seem to think that that is a realistic scenario, and that speaks volumes.

I believe that the logical response is "but letting obamacare ruin the country and kill millions would be petty, cruel and evil. We should stop it now rather than play politics".

So they can be consistent on that end, or at least they can try to appear to be.


Given some of the derp I've seen from my friends on Facebook, I can see that
 
2013-09-30 08:04:40 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: Rincewind53: Things that D_I_A is currently being forced to pay for:
- Housing relief for low-income families
- Oil subsidies to Exxon
- Agricultural subsidies to Monsanto
- Head Start programs for small children
- Food stamps for low-income families in Detroit
- The janitor whose job it is to clean the toilets at the Statue of Liberty
- Bamboo to feed the pandas at the National Zoo
- Hedge-trimming costs at Arlington National Cemetary
- President Obama's vacations
- My drink two weekends ago, which was paid for by my friend who is a Congressional staffer.

And now we're going to add 'free' heathcare for all to that list because it (like everything else you listed) the government has determined to be a moral duty.


No, the civilized individuals of the United States determined it is a moral duty.

It's fine that you don't understand or grasp the concept.
 
2013-09-30 08:05:33 PM
Was just watching CNN, that Erin Burnett broad.

Pregnant female anchors are great.  "Okay, I kinda look like a whale, so I can can concentrate on getting good, reasonable answers on good questions so the muthafarkin gloves are OFF!"

/do not
//NOT
///mess with a pregnant dame

why yes I watched some Bogey this weekend
 
2013-09-30 08:05:51 PM

nyseattitude: It's fine that you don't understand or grasp the concept.


Ask him about the Iraqi war!
 
2013-09-30 08:06:22 PM
The house needs to see taking the nation hostage will not work or they will keep doing it.
 
2013-09-30 08:06:44 PM
You have a hell of a slippery slope problem too. Is there any reason to think if the dems started giving them what they wanted that in the future they won't just do the same shiat and threaten gov shut downs and debt defaults if we didn't ban abortion, kill gun control, or fund NPR?
 
2013-09-30 08:06:53 PM

feckingmorons: Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.


Thar's one way to look at it. Completely ass backwards but one way.
 
2013-09-30 08:06:59 PM

DeArmondVI: tomcatadam: DeArmondVI: The Tea Party has so little faith in how the Constitution sets forward for bills becoming law that they are willing to fark over the economy, and hence the US population, in order to force their ideology on the population.

This whole charade is simple one big F**K you to the Founding Fathers, courtesy of the Tea Party.

If Obamacare truly is the nightmare that the GOP has claimed it to be, then the public will soon realize it, the Democrats will be driven from office in shame in 2014 and 2016 and the GOP will be able to roll back everything that the public will soon hate.

It is rather curious that they don't seem to think that that is a realistic scenario, and that speaks volumes.

I believe that the logical response is "but letting obamacare ruin the country and kill millions would be petty, cruel and evil. We should stop it now rather than play politics".

So they can be consistent on that end, or at least they can try to appear to be.

Given some of the derp I've seen from my friends on Facebook, I can see that


Is Facebook really that political in practice? I'm not on it but it seems rude to make political comments via Facebook.

From what I've seen from my wife's account Facebook is for 30 something women sharing inane stories about their kids. Fark is for political shiat.
 
2013-09-30 08:07:49 PM

nyseattitude: Dancin_In_Anson: Rincewind53: Things that D_I_A is currently being forced to pay for:
- Housing relief for low-income families
- Oil subsidies to Exxon
- Agricultural subsidies to Monsanto
- Head Start programs for small children
- Food stamps for low-income families in Detroit
- The janitor whose job it is to clean the toilets at the Statue of Liberty
- Bamboo to feed the pandas at the National Zoo
- Hedge-trimming costs at Arlington National Cemetary
- President Obama's vacations
- My drink two weekends ago, which was paid for by my friend who is a Congressional staffer.

And now we're going to add 'free' heathcare for all to that list because it (like everything else you listed) the government has determined to be a moral duty.

No, the civilized individuals of the United States determined it is a moral duty.

It's fine that you don't understand or grasp the concept.


And as a bonus, judging by the rest of the developed world, a UHC system will cost *everyone* less than the system currently in place, have fewer out of pocket costs, and people won't end up destitute as a result of being injured or sick.

But we can't do that, because reasons.
 
2013-09-30 08:08:10 PM

grimlock1972: The house needs to see taking the nation hostage will not work or they will keep doing it.


Like they have every time the budget has come up for debate while Obama has been in office?

They have kept doing it and we've told them every single time that we don't care if they take the nation's economy hostage. This year isn't any different.
 
2013-09-30 08:08:25 PM

SirVagTheTighty: You have a hell of a slippery slope problem too. Is there any reason to think if the dems started giving them what they wanted that in the future they won't just do the same shiat and threaten gov shut downs and debt defaults if we didn't ban abortion, kill gun control, or fund NPR?


The last three democratic presidents have faced government shutdowns and impeachment threats to varying degrees.

I would just go ahead and assume that when a democrat is president...this is standard operation procedure.
 
2013-09-30 08:09:57 PM

Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative


ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.
 
2013-09-30 08:10:32 PM

Mugato: feckingmorons: Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.

Thar's one way to look at it. Completely ass backwards but one way.


i.imgur.com

An ass backwards way of looking at things is a kind of way to look at things.
 
2013-09-30 08:10:43 PM

SirVagTheTighty: You have a hell of a slippery slope problem too. Is there any reason to think if the dems started giving them what they wanted that in the future they won't just do the same shiat and threaten gov shut downs and debt defaults if we didn't ban abortion, kill gun control, or fund NPR?


Depends on the gun control that needs to be killed. *ducks*
 
2013-09-30 08:11:33 PM

HeartBurnKid: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

The United States does not negotiate with terrorists.


Yes, several people have made that argument, Republicans have also been called arsonists, anarchists, extortionists, black mailers, hostage takers and an assistant to President Obama even went so far as to say they won't negotiate with 'People with bombs strapped to their chests."

I'm not certain if it is hyperbole or lunacy, but I suspect the latter. The name calling, especially after a Democratic call for more civil discourse after Rep. Giffords was shot, is fanning the flames.

Obama care is not that important, it is a bad law - even with the changes that have been made- and a year delay would allow time for a fix, or more probably a repeal. The Democrats are deathly afraid of that as it will be obvious to everyone that Obama is a failure. Now many of us see Obama as a failure and we can wait for history to also identify his as the inept leader he is. However the Democrats know the electorate is fickle and the want to hold on to the catastrophe that is their leader's crowning achievement for as long as possible.

You can insult those opposed to Obamacare, we all quite used to it, but you can't polish the pile of crap that it is any longer. We know what a nightmare it is. Obama's legacy will be a failed economy, ruined to a huge extent by this law that was enacted using scheme and artifice. If it was good would they have had to bribe people to get it passed? I'm not concerned about Obama care, I know I'll be taxed more, I have been taxed more. The poor people, the students, the people who can't get a full time job, those are the people it is hurting. I'll have to skip Banff next year.

So continue with the name calling, and have fun with your mandatory overpriced insurance. Want a commercial 80/20 plan with a high deductible. Sorry those don't meet MEP standards and you have to pay a fine - a tax really. The only way Obamacare is still a law is because it fines people who can't or won't buy insurance. It is legal simply because it punishes those who can least afford it.

No one can say in good conscience there is nothing wrong with Obamacare.
 
2013-09-30 08:12:15 PM
In chart form:

pbs.twimg.com
 
2013-09-30 08:12:15 PM

orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.


Agreed. But that's what happens when you compromise with Republicans and implement their ideas.
 
2013-09-30 08:13:07 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: From what I've seen from my wife's account Facebook is for 30 something women sharing inane stories about their kids. Fark is for political shiat


Lots of politics on FB - LOTS of politics. In fact I see far more poli photoshops there than I do here anymore.
 
2013-09-30 08:13:46 PM

Weatherkiss: Personally, I think we have the government we deserve. We go through this economic hostage situation every year. Every election year the same assholes keep getting re-elected. Noone recalls their senators or representatives for this kind of bullshiat they pull. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Teahadists are insane. We elect insane people to congress.

Yep. This is working exactly as intended and we get the government we deserve.


GREAT post and right about everything except one.

You deserve way better.  Two parties willing to work together for the betterment of your quality of life and the WORLD'S instead of a dysfunctional insane asylum in suits would be a good start.
 
2013-09-30 08:15:27 PM

orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.


Even I agree that single payer would be a vast improvement over Obamacare.
 
2013-09-30 08:15:27 PM

orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.


I'm not sure it's better than the status quo. It entrenches subsidies into an inefficient program that is built on under penalized individual mandates while adding to economically inefficient employer mandates.

The ideal would be a national mutual insurer that charges everyone the same rate. National community rating. No subsidies. Death panels optional but certainly not forbidden.

Sorry UnitedHealth and WellPoint, maybe we'll contract you for admin services.
 
2013-09-30 08:16:50 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: DarwiOdrade: At least this way we end up paying less.

You think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free.*

*Plagiarized from PJ O'Rourke

unyon: I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you're not suffering from a chronic life threatening illness while having substandard insurance.

No, but I've been broke.


And during that time that you were broke, I presume that you put your limited resources into the basics- food, clothing, shelter. And, given limited resources and tough choices, likely rolled the bones with your health care and likely the health care of your family.

Do I have the scenario about right?  And during that time that you gambled with your families health, were you honestly more concerned about big government?
 
2013-09-30 08:17:09 PM

rustypouch: orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.

Agreed. But that's what happens when you compromise with Republicans and implement their ideas.


The democrats were spineless. When they had control of the House they should have just rammed through the legislation in one of its more robust forms just like the Rethuglicans did when Bush the Lesser was in office. The moment they took single payer out of the bill, I knew the Republicans wouldn't stop there and would force them to make concession after concession. But then the democrats lost the House and we have this shiat instead.

There's stuff wrong with ACA, but it's thanks to the Democrats being spineless and cowing to Republican demands when they really shouldn't have, and it's certainly a lot better than what we had before. Which was having insurance companies fark everyone over.
 
2013-09-30 08:17:25 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Sorry UnitedHealth and WellPoint, maybe we'll contract you for admin services.


Who do you think are the third party payers for most government policies now? There is plenty of insurance to sell, and health insurance is not remarkably profitable in comparison to P&C. The present policy issuers would be happy to take on a third party payer role and lose all of the risk.
 
2013-09-30 08:17:50 PM

orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.


It depends on the implementation. Normally? I guess so. But I'm not convinced that arbitrarily setting prices vs. Allowing healthy competition determine prices where the consumer makes the choices is iffy in my mind.

What isn't iffy to me is that however we get there, part of our society means we take care of our own. And as long as the little guy contributes in return however he can, great. I don't believe in free rides, nor do I believe in just telling someone to fark off if they needed help.
 
2013-09-30 08:17:51 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


Taxes are not a personal attack, they are an agreement you tacitly abide, by living here.

Once the baggers understand this, things can get moving again.
 
2013-09-30 08:17:55 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: In a way, I can totally understand viewing the budget CRs and the debt ceiling as leverage points. I mean, it is the desire to not have the US government shut down or for the US to not default on its obligation would seem to present serious incentive to acquiesce.

But in assigning blame, it's pretty clear that the party attempting to extract those concessions ought to be the group that bears the risk for the consequences.

We need a CR. It is obvious that Obamacare is defective as many parts of it have been delayed by Obama himself and other parts repealed - the 1099 for all small business transactions got the chop a few years ago if I recall. It is flawed and delaying that until it can be repaired is not unreasonable.

Refusing to delay flawed legislation and forcing the country into a governmental shutdown simply to make a point is improper, and yet that is the Democrat position.


You're wrong.

The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.
 
2013-09-30 08:18:10 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: DeArmondVI:

Given some of the derp I've seen from my friends on Facebook, I can see that

Is Facebook really that political in practice? I'm not on it but it seems rude to make political comments via Facebook.

From what I've seen from my wife's account Facebook is for 30 something women sharing inane stories about their kids. Fark is for political shiat.


I've got a few leftist derp friends that constantly put up whatever meme picture for PETA they come across, some right winger friends who post links from The Blaze everyday, and a few loony friends who post Infowars links.

Sadly, since I know all parties involved IRL, I kinda wish I wasn't privy to their political views. But, yes, there are plenty of people who view FB as the best vehicle for stating their politics (see: Sarah Palin).
 
2013-09-30 08:18:30 PM

feckingmorons: HeartBurnKid: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

The United States does not negotiate with terrorists.

Yes, several people have made that argument, Republicans have also been called arsonists, anarchists, extortionists, black mailers, hostage takers and an assistant to President Obama even went so far as to say they won't negotiate with 'People with bombs strapped to their chests."

I'm not certain if it is hyperbole or lunacy, but I suspect the latter. The name calling, especially after a Democratic call for more civil discourse after Rep. Giffords was shot, is fanning the flames.

Obama care is not that important, it is a bad law - even with the changes that have been made- and a year delay would allow time for a fix, or more probably a repeal. The Democrats are deathly afraid of that as it will be obvious to everyone that Obama is a failure. Now many of us see Obama as a failure and we can wait for history to also identify his as the inept leader he is. However the Democrats know the electorate is fickle and the want to hold on to the catastrophe that is their leader's crowning achievement for as long as possible.

You can insult those opposed to Obamacare, we all quite used to it, but you can't polish the pile of crap that it is any longer. We know what a nightmare it is. Obama's legacy will be a failed economy, ruined to a huge extent by this law that was enacted using scheme and artifice. If it was good would they have had to bribe people to get it passed? I'm not concerned about Obama care, I know I'll be taxed more, I have been taxed more. The poor people, the students, the people who can't get a full time job, those are the people it is hurting. I'll have to skip Banff next year.

So con ...


Yes, they're so deathly afraid of it, they want it implemented sooner rather than later- because they know it will be such a massive fail.  Right.
 
2013-09-30 08:18:44 PM

feckingmorons: HeartBurnKid: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

The United States does not negotiate with terrorists.

Yes, several people have made that argument, Republicans have also been called arsonists, anarchists, extortionists, black mailers, hostage takers and an assistant to President Obama even went so far as to say they won't negotiate with 'People with bombs strapped to their chests."

I'm not certain if it is hyperbole or lunacy, but I suspect the latter. The name calling, especially after a Democratic call for more civil discourse after Rep. Giffords was shot, is fanning the flames.

Obama care is not that important, it is a bad law - even with the changes that have been made- and a year delay would allow time for a fix, or more probably a repeal. The Democrats are deathly afraid of that as it will be obvious to everyone that Obama is a failure. Now many of us see Obama as a failure and we can wait for history to also identify his as the inept leader he is. However the Democrats know the electorate is fickle and the want to hold on to the catastrophe that is their leader's crowning achievement for as long as possible.

You can insult those opposed to Obamacare, we all quite used to it, but you can't polish the pile of crap that it is any longer. We know what a nightmare it is. Obama's legacy will be a failed economy, ruined to a huge extent by this law that was enacted using scheme and artifice. If it was good would they have had to bribe people to get it passed? I'm not concerned about Obama care, I know I'll be taxed more, I have been taxed more. The poor people, the students, the people who can't get a full time job, those are the people it is hurting. I'll have to skip Banff next year.

So continue with the name calling, and have fun with your mandatory overpriced insurance. Want a commercial 80/20 plan with a high deductible. Sorry those don't meet MEP standards and you have to pay a fine - a tax really. The only way Obamacare is still a law is because it fines people who can't or won't buy insurance. It is legal simply because it punishes those who can least afford it.

No one can say in good conscience there is nothing wrong with Obamacare.


People that can't afford to buy insurance have no reason to buy a high deduct able 80/20 plan. If they had to use it, then it would bankrupt them so what is the point? aca does let them buy insurance that is really useful, affordable, and they can use it without going bankrupt though. So they got that going for them. We 'fine' people all the time for shiat. It is called taxes. We also let people out of taxes for doing certain things. For example iI own a house. The government reduces my taxes every year for the interest, property taxes, and a few other things.
 
2013-09-30 08:20:25 PM

bulldg4life: SirVagTheTighty: You have a hell of a slippery slope problem too. Is there any reason to think if the dems started giving them what they wanted that in the future they won't just do the same shiat and threaten gov shut downs and debt defaults if we didn't ban abortion, kill gun control, or fund NPR?

The last three democratic presidents have faced government shutdowns and impeachment threats to varying degrees.

I would just go ahead and assume that when a democrat is president...this is standard operation procedure.


All the Presidents including President Ford have had government shut downs, save president Obama. The ones that were impeached did something wrong, President Nixon wasn't a Democrat if I recall, although I didn't vote for him.

You can't conveniently omit facts and then form an opinion. Well, you can but you look silly when you do.
 
2013-09-30 08:20:32 PM
And it's 90 days folks.

90 days.

What huge policy concessions are they going to demand in December so that they don't blow this thing up then? Privitization of Social Security?
 
2013-09-30 08:22:15 PM

birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.


The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.
 
2013-09-30 08:22:30 PM

DeArmondVI: Debeo Summa Credo: DeArmondVI:

Given some of the derp I've seen from my friends on Facebook, I can see that

Is Facebook really that political in practice? I'm not on it but it seems rude to make political comments via Facebook.

From what I've seen from my wife's account Facebook is for 30 something women sharing inane stories about their kids. Fark is for political shiat.

I've got a few leftist derp friends that constantly put up whatever meme picture for PETA they come across, some right winger friends who post links from The Blaze everyday, and a few loony friends who post Infowars links.

Sadly, since I know all parties involved IRL, I kinda wish I wasn't privy to their political views. But, yes, there are plenty of people who view FB as the best vehicle for stating their politics (see: Sarah Palin).


Man, they should all discover fark. It's perfect for anonymous political venting (albeit predominantly populated by left wingers)
 
2013-09-30 08:22:38 PM
I like how the spin is the government shutdown will tank the economy, but as employers slash worker hours to avoid Obamacare, that health care law isn't going to tank the economy.

Spinning, spinning.
 
2013-09-30 08:22:45 PM
It's rather sociopathic to insist on sticking the fork in the socket, forcing the issue to see if they can bend reality with just their malice. I wouldn't be surprised if the house refused to fund the government even after a week of shutdown and another credit downgrade. They said they would rather see America burned to the ground than for Obama to succeed. That's what this is. Don't forget it.
 
2013-09-30 08:22:51 PM

birdmanesq: And it's 90 days folks.

90 days.

What huge policy concessions are they going to demand in December so that they don't blow this thing up then? Privitization of Social Security?


Do you really believe that?
 
2013-09-30 08:23:55 PM

jbc: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

Why should anyone, much less the US government, negotiate with terrorists?


I'm starting to disagree with the "terrorists" metaphor (and yes, I know it's a metaphor; no one is literally calling them "terrorists") because it's starting to taste a bit emotionalistic. It's almost a sort of Godwinning, and it's adoption by some of the Democratic leadership has emboldened a lot of us to play kind of fast and loose with the comparison.

Make no mistake; the Republicans are definitely negotiating in bad faith. There was a Congressman on NPR earlier today who is clearly buffaloed by the unpopularity of the Republicans and thinks that this is what negotiation looks like. He's utterly convinced that Obama's temporary delay on certain complex ACA provisions mean that the President has put the whole thing on the table and can't figure out why he hasn't caved yet. The idea that the Democrats have simply given all the ground they're going to give has just not occurred to him. It was bizarre to listen to.

/libbiest lib who etc...
 
2013-09-30 08:24:07 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


Why would you negotiate with someone that is dumping it in the trashcan? Why don't they pass something to make it better and then we can all take a look at that?
 
2013-09-30 08:24:16 PM

Weatherkiss: rustypouch: orclover: Kit Fister: Debeo Summa Credo: You know, in the left wing derposphere that fark has devolved into I'm considered a far right winger. I think we spend too much and think ACA is a bad law, etc. etc.

But I want to go on record again and say this dance with shutdown and debt ceiling nonsense is petty and childish of the GOP. Ive shifted enough to the right in the past few years that I'd love to vote against the dems but alas the GOP isn't a viable alternative right now.

I feel the same, but nothing about the ACA in general is even bad. Right now progun democrat is the best alternative

ACA is an obomination.  We should have a single payer system.  Obamacare is all we get, its slightly better than having absolutely nothing.  But its a piece of shiat and you know it.

Agreed. But that's what happens when you compromise with Republicans and implement their ideas.

The democrats were spineless. When they had control of the House they should have just rammed through the legislation in one of its more robust forms just like the Rethuglicans did when Bush the Lesser was in office. The moment they took single payer out of the bill, I knew the Republicans wouldn't stop there and would force them to make concession after concession. But then the democrats lost the House and we have this shiat instead.

There's stuff wrong with ACA, but it's thanks to the Democrats being spineless and cowing to Republican demands when they really shouldn't have, and it's certainly a lot better than what we had before. Which was having insurance companies fark everyone over.


Yep. The ACA is an improvement.

But I still can't get over the irony that conservatives considered it a great idea when proposed by the Heritage Foundation, and implemented in Mass. by Romney, but now that a nigge Democrat has used their ideas, it's the worst thing ever and they're willing to blow up the country because of it.

Having a UNC system in the US would be for the best, unless you're an insurance company.
 
2013-09-30 08:24:31 PM

SlothB77: I like how the spin is the government shutdown will tank the economy, but as employers slash worker hours to avoid Obamacare, that health care law isn't going to tank the economy.

Spinning, spinning.


I agree with you a lot of times but this time I truly believe the GOPs brinksmanship is detrimental and childish.

ACA is garbage but its the law. We just have to deal with it as does the GOP.
 
2013-09-30 08:24:32 PM

feckingmorons: Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.

What do I get in return, a continuing resolution to fund the government? OK you've got a deal.


You're not paying attention. You'll get nothing. You'll get nothing and like it. That's the compromise, see?
 
2013-09-30 08:24:41 PM
List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.

Members of Congress/staffers
24 Hour Fitness
Allied Building Inspectors IUOE Local 211 Welfare Fund
Alpha Omega Home Health, LLC
Andersen Corporation
Bowman Sheet Metal Heating & Air-conditioning
Bricklayers Insurance & Welfare Fund
Bridge, Structural, Ornamental & Reinforcing Ironworkers Local Union No. 60*
Carey Johnson Oil Co, Inc
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany*
Cement Masons' Local No. 502 Welfare Fund
City of Bloomington VEBA Health Savings Plan*
City of Burnsville*
City of Olathe*
Clausen Miller PC
Crystal Run Village, Inc*
Delta Apparel
Discovery Benefits*
Dr. Trailer Repair, Inc.
Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Health and Welfare Fund
Entrust
Fabri-Quilt
GC Harvesting, Inc.
Glen Curtis, Inc. #2143
Heritage Christian Services
IBEW Local 3 NYC Electrical Division Health & Welfare Fund
Indiana Area UFCW Union Locals and Retail Food Employers' Health and Welfare Plan
Ingham County
Innovative Driver Services Company
Integrity Data*
Inter-County Hospitalization Plan, Inc.
Jakov P. Dulcich & Sons
Jefferson Rehabilitation Center
JLG Harvesting, Inc.
Johnson Machine Works
Kent County
Laborers' District Council of Virginia Health and Welfare Trust Fund
Laborers National Health and Welfare Fund
Local 1245 Health Fund
Local 237 Teamsters Suffolk Regional Off-Track Betting Corp. Health and Welfare Trust Fund
Local 295 Welfare Fund
Local 381 Group Insurance Fund
Local 805 Welfare Fund
Marble Industry Trust Fund
McGregor Schools ISD #4*
MJ Soffe
MO-Kan Teamsters and Welfare Fund
Mounds View Public Schools*
MVP
North State Bank
North States Industries Inc*
Pathways Inc.
Pavers and Road Builders District Council Welfare Fund
Phoenix Children's Academy
Roofers Local 8 Insurance & Trust Fund
San Bernardino IHSS Public Authority
SCC Healthcare Group, LLP
Schenectady ARC*
Schoharie County ARC*
Sieben Polk Law Firm
Sitel, Inc.
Southern Graphic Communication Health Fund
Springbrook Standalone HRA*
St. Lawrence NYSARC*
Sunview Vineyards of California, Inc.
Tandem Eastern Inc. / Consolidated Transport Systems, Inc.
Taylor Farms
Teamsters Union Local # 35
The Day Care Council/Council of Supervisors and Administrators Welfare Fund
The Public Authority of San Luis Obispo County
The University Financing Foundation, Inc.
The Village of Newark Non-Union Employee Plan*
Theatrical Stage Employees Local One
Tuff Shed, Inc.
U.A. Local 13 & Employers Group Insurance Plan*
UFCW & Participating Food Industry Employers Tri-State Health & Welfare Fund
UFCW Local 1500 Welfare Fund
UFCW Local One Health Care Fund
Ulster Greene ARC*
Westminster-Canterbury of Lynchburg
Wine and Liquor Salesmen of NJ
A-1 Transport
AIDS Council of Northeastern New York
Avon Central School District
Azeros Health Plans, Inc.*
Benton County*
Bessey Tools, Inc.
Canandaigua City Schools*
City of Eagan*
City of Shakopee Post-Employment Health Care Savings Account Plan *
Community Work and Independence Inc.
Continuing Developmental Services
Crystal Cabinet Works, Inc.
CU*Answers, Inc.
Euromarket Designs, Inc., d/b/a Crate and Barrel
First National Bank of Dietrerich
Franziska Racker Centers*
Fridley Public Schools Health Savings Plan*
FSA/SUNYAB-Campus Dining and Shops
Genesee County ARC*
Genesee County Economic Development Corp Health Reimbursement Account*
Grand Island Central School District*
Hammondsport Central School District
Imperial Wholesale, Inc.
Learning Disabilities Association of Western New York
Minnesota State Retirement System Post-Employment Health Care Savings Plan - City of Roseville*
Naples Central School District
Naples Central School District Support Staff
Newark Central School District
Niagara-Wheatfield CSD Self Funded
Panama Central School District
People 1st Health Strategies, Inc.
Pipe Fitters' Welfare Fund, Local 597*
Ron Clark Construction Health reimbursement Arrangement*
Sherman Central School District
Silver Creek Central School District*
Sodus Central School District
Telco Construction
Town of Albion
Town of Chenango
Town of Lockport
Twin City Die Casting*
Western Area Volunteer Emergency Services *
Westfield Academy*
Williamson Central School District
American Radio Association Plan
Carpenters Health and Security Trust of Western Washington
Communicare Health Benefits Trust
District Council 1707 Local 389 Home Care Employees Health & Welfare Fund
Health and Welfare Plan of the Laundry, Dry Cleaning Workers & Allied Industry Health Fund, Workers United
Northern Illinois and Iowa Laborers Health and Welfare Fund
Prell Services
United Food and Commercial Workers Retail Employees and Employers Health and Welfare Plan
A-1 Realty*
AABR*
ABCO Diecasters*
Alfred P. Sloan*
Alizio & Galfunt*
All American Heating and AC*
Allied Pilots Association
Amherst Central School District*
AristaCare at Meadow Springs*
Arthur Sanderson& Sons*
Associated General Contractors of ND Employees*
Autistic Service, Inc.*
Bartech Group
Basf Fuel Cell, Inc.*
Battery Park City Authority*
Battery Park City Conservancy*
Benefit Analysis Inc.*
Blaze SSI*
Blue Beacon
Board of Trustees for the Operating Engineers Local 101 Health and Welfare Fund
Business Wire*
Cargo Ventures*
Carnegie Corporation of NY*
Carpenters Local No. 491 Health & Welfare Plan
Central Laborers' Welfare Fund
Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Health and Welfare Fund
City of Cottage Grove*
City of Inver Grove Heights*
City Of Roseville MN*
Clinton Management*
Cloquet Area Fire Department*
Cohen Partners*
Community Bank of Bergen County*
Community Mainstreaming*
Contract Cleaners Service Employees Benefit Trust
Cornerstone Search Group*
D & D Ag Supply and Construction, Inc.*
Dial Senior Management, Inc
Douglaston Development*
Dr. Margaret Andrin, MD FACOG LLC*
Dynasil Corporation*
Echo Molding*
Eighth District Electrical Benefit Fund
Electrical Workers Health and Welfare Fund
Enterprise Concrete Products, LLC Texas
Epilepsy Foundation*
Epilepsy Foundation Northeastern New York*
Evans Chemetics*
Excellus Health Plan
Fairport Central School District*
Goodwill Industries of Central Indiana
Gregory Packaging*
Gulf Coast Health Care
Handcraft Manufacturing Corporation*
Haver Analytics Health Waiver*
Health Care Employees Dental and Medical Trust
Hiawatha Medical, Inc.*
Highfield Gardens Care Center*
Hirsch International*
Hotel, Restaurant & Bar Employees Health and Welfare Fund
Hypex Inc.*
IBEW Local Union No. 126 Health and Welfare Fund
International Union of Operating Engineers, Supplemental Benefit Fund Local 409*
Interstate Connecting Components*
Jacobson Family Investments*
J-B Wholesale Pet Supplies*
JKL International*
Jump, Scutellaro, and Co., LLP*
KC International dba Ekman Recycling*
Kerwin Communications*
Kingstown Capital Management*
Koellman Gear Corporation*
Kramer Electronics*
Lakeview Subacute Care Center*
Langan Engineering and Financial Services, Inc.*
LBDD*
League of Minnesota Cities*
Leisure Properties LLC d/b/a/ Crownline Boats*
Liberty House Nursing Home*
Lifetime Assistance, Inc*
Lincoln Hall*
Local 888 UFCW
Maharishi University of Management
Mamiya America Corporation*
Mandt Reiss & Associates PLLC
Margaret P. Muscarelle Child Dev. Center*
Merrill Farms LLC
Micelli Motors, Inc.*
Midwest Asphalt Corporation *
Midwest Teamsters
Monroe County*
Nassau County Chapter, NYSARC, Inc*
NCHC, Inc.*
New York State Assn. for Retarded Children Erie Co. Chapter dba/Heritage Centers*
NJ Society of CPAs*
North Greece Fire District*
Northern Minnesota-Wisconsin Area Retail Food Health & Welfare Fund
Ogontz Avenue Revitalization Corporation*
Parkview Care and Rehab*
PCB Machining Solutions*
PCB Piezotronics*
Philadelphia Macaroni Company*
Phoenix Partners Group, LP*
Privilege Underwriters, Inc.*
Progressive AE*
Quadrant Capital Advisors, Inc.*
Regency Management Group, LLC*
Rhoads Industries*
Roofers Local #96 Health & Welfare Fund
Rowe and Company, Inc.*
Rush-Henrietta Central School District HRA*
Security Benefit Fund of the Uniformed Firefighters Association of New York City
SEIU Health and Welfare fund, 2000
Seneca Cayuga ARC*
Service Employees 32BJ North Health Benefit Fund*
Sierra Video Systems*
SMEG*
Strategic Industries*
Superior Officers Council Health and Welfare Fund
Teamsters Local Union 966 Health Fund
Techno Source USA*
The Alternative Living Group, Inc.*
The Arc of Otsego (Otsego County Chapter NYSARC, Inc.)*
The Arc of Rensselaer County*
The City of Cloquet*
The Henry Luce Foundation*
The Maritime Aquarium of Norwalk, Inc.*
The Pew Charitable Trusts*
The Rehabilitation Center*
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation*
Topco*
Totino Grace High School*
Urstadt Biddle Properties*
W.H. Reaves & Co., Inc.*
Walder, Hayden & Brogan, PA*
Walters-Morgan Construction, Inc.
Wellspring Advisors*
West Bergen Mental Healthcare*
Westchester ARC*
Westchester JCS*
Western Beef*
Hollow Metal Trust Fund
Theatrical Teamsters Local 817 IBT Welfare Fund
Vestal Manufacturing Enterprises, Inc.
AccessAbility, Inc.
Ackerman Oil Employee Benefit Trust
Albany County Chapter, NYSARC Inc., DBA New Visions of Albany*
American Eagle Outfitters
Basin Disposal
Bengard Ranch, Inc.
Bestway Rental, Inc
Big Lots, Inc.
Byrd Harvest, Inc.
Cardinal Hayes Home for Children HRA plan*
CDS Administrative Services, LLC
Center for Energy and Environment*
City of Brooklyn Park*
D'Arrigo Bros. Co. of California
Defender Services, Inc.
DineEquity, Inc
Green Leaf Distributors, Inc.
IBEW Local Union No. 728 Family Healthcare Plan
Joseph Gallo Farms
Life Benefit Plan
Luther Automotive Group HRA*
Metrics Inc.
Nueces County Appraisal District
Ocean Properties Ltd
P-R Farms, Inc.
SEIU Health & Welfare Fund
Sports Arena Employees' Local 137 Welfare Fund
Staywell Saipan Basic Plan
Truck Drivers and Helpers Local 355 Health and Welfare Fund
Communications Workers of America, Local 1180 Security Benefits Fund
Health and Welfare Fund of the Detectives' Endowment Association, Inc. Police Department City of New York
Man-U Service Contract Health and Welfare Fund
Paschall Truck Lines, Inc.
SEIU Local 300, Civil Service Forum Employees Welfare Fund
Electrical Welfare Trust Fund
Highmark West Virginia Inc. d/b/a Mountain State Blue Cross Blue Shield
Advocacy and Resource Center*
Amalgamated, Industrial and Toy & Novelty Workers of America, Local 223 Sick Benefit Fund
Atlanta Plumbers & Steamfitters Fringe Benefit Funds
Aurora Consulting Group, Inc.*
Brock Enterprises, Inc.
Central Texas Health and Benefit Trust Fund Locals 520, 60 & 72
Electricians Health, Welfare & Pension Plans I.B.E.W. Local Union No. 995
Essex County Chapter NYSARC, Inc. dba Mountain Lake Services*
Executive Management Services, Inc.
Florida Laborers Health Fund
Fulton County Chapter NYSARC, Inc.*
General Parts, LLC*
Greystone program, Inc*
Hacienda Harvesting, Inc.
IBEW Local No. 640 and Arizona Chapter NECA Health & Welfare Trust Fund
Lone Star Park at Grand Prairie
Louisiana Electrical Health Fund
Maverick, Inc. Employee Health Care Benefits Plan
Memphis Construction Benefit Fund
Mid-South Carpenters Regional Council Health and Welfare Fund
Mountain Lake Services
NECA-IBEW Local 480 Health and Welfare Plan
Plumbers and Pipefitters Welfare Fund of Local Union No. 719
Retiree Plan of the Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Health and Welfare Fund
Richmond Community Services*
Sheet Metal Workers Local No. 177 Health and Welfare, Pension and Vacation Funds
Sheet Metal Workers' National Health Fund
South Central Laborers' Health & Welfare Fund
Southeastern Pipetrades Health & Welfare Fund
Telamon Corporation Health Reimbursement Arrangement*
The ARC of Delaware County*
UFCW Local 1262 and Employers Health & Welfare Fund
United Cerebral Palsy of Ulster County, Inc*
Vincent B Zaninovich & Sons, Inc.
Wayne ARC Standalone HRA Section 105 Plan*
Wildwood Program*
Allied Welfare Fund
Becker County Post-Retirement Health Care Savings Plan*
Becker County VEBA*
FIDUCIA*
Triple-S Salud, Inc.
B. R. Company
Britz Companies, ET AL
Century Health and Wellness Benefit Plan and Trust
EBSA Foundation
Encore Enterprises
Faurecia USA Holdings
Goodwill Industries of Kentucky, Inc.
Minnesota Cement Masons Health and Welfare Fund
Plumbers Local Union No. 690 of Philadelphia and Vicinity Health Plan
Robert Heath Trucking Inc
Securitas Security Services USA, Inc.
Sunwest Fruit Company, Inc
The Louis Berger Group, Inc.
United Food & Commercial Workers Unions and Employers Midwest Health Benefits Fund
WD Young& Sons, Inc.
Atlantis Casino Resort Spa
United Food and Commercial Workers and Employers Arizona
Act Trust Mini-Med Plan
Allen's Family Food
Anderson Media Corporation
Blasters, Drillers & Miners Union Local No. 29 Welfare Fund
Care Initiatives, Inc.
Cement and Concrete Workers District Council Welfare Fund Plan
COARC*
Construction Workers Local 147 Welfare Fund
Crystal Run Healthcare
Diamondback Management Services, LTD
Freeman Metal Products
Hardwick Clothes, Inc.
Hronis, Inc.
International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers
Isaacson Isaacson Seridan & Fountain, LLP
Katy Industries, Inc.
Landscape, Irrigation and Lawn Sprinkler Industry Health and Welfare Plan and Trust
Local 298 Health Benefit Fund Plan
Local 803 Health and Welfare Fund
Louisiana Laborers Health and Welfare Fund
M.A. Mortenson
Maple Knoll Communities
Marshall Durbin Food Corporation
Minnesota Teamsters Construction Division
Name Brand, Inc.
Oklahoma Goodwill Industries
PepsiCo, Inc
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 823 Health & Welfare Fund
Plumbers & Steamfitters Local No. 6 Health and Welfare Fund
Regent Care Center
Rice Food Markets, Inc.
Rice Food Markets, Inc.
Ricker Oil Company
Skilled Health Care
Southwestern Teamsters Security Fund
Teamsters Local 445 Welfare Plan
Teamsters Local 210 Affiliated Health and Insurance Fund
Teamsters Welfare Fund of Northern New Jersey Local 1723
The Durango Herald
The Talbots, Inc
Town of Frisco Medical Plan
Tudor Ranch
UNITE HERE Local 74 Welfare and Dental Trust
United Employees Health Plans
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1000 and Kroger Dallas Health and Welfare Plan
United Service Employees Union, Local 377, RWDSU, UFCW
WageWorks, Inc
IBEW Local 613 and Contributing Employers Family Health Plan (Union)
Advantage Benefits Company, LLC
Aerospace Contractors' Trust**
AJFC Community Action Plan**
Altisource Portfolio Solutions
American Heritage Life Insurance Company
Americare Properties, Inc.
AMN Healthcare
Andrews Transport L.P.**
Anoka Hennepin Credit Union* **
APWU Health Plan Conversion Plan
Aspen Snowmass**
ATCO Rubber Products, Inc
Baylor County Hospital District
Belk Farms**
Bricklayers Local 1 of MD, VA and DC
Cardon & Associates, Inc**
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Ogdensburg
Central Mills**
Civil Service Bar Association Security Benefit Fund**
Cotton Belt Inc.**
CPC Logistics Health & Welfare Plan**
Delmarva United Food and Commercial Workers**
Dole Food Company**
EchoStar**
First Acceptance Corporation
Fontanese Folts Aubrecht Ernst Architects, PC**
Forest Products Inc. Group Health Plan**
Fruhauf Uniform Direct Labor
Golden State Bulb Growers, Inc.**
Greater Kansas City Laborers Welfare Fund**
Grower's Transport LLC
Heartland Automotive**
Helfman Enterprises, Inc.**
Hoosier Stamping and Manufacturing Corp.
Horizon Bay Realty LLC**
I.B.E.W. Local 1249 Insurance Fund**
Ingomar Packing Company, LLC
Integra Healthcare, Inc. (Integrity Home Care)**
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers**
International Brotherhood of Trade Unions Health and Welfare Fund - Local 713
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 295-295C Welfare Trust Fund**
International union of Operating Engineers, Local Union Number 137**
Iron Workers Local Union #28 Health and Welfare Fund**
Lamanuzzi & Pantaleo**
Living Resources**
Local 1102 Amalgamated Welfare Fund
Local 1102 Health & Benefit Fund
Local 1102 Welfare Fund-- Lerner Employees
Local 272 Welfare Fund**
Local 338 Affiliated Benefit Funds
Madelia Community Hospital**
Max Homes, Loc**
Medical Development Corporation**
Mesa Air Group**
Mesa Packing**
Michigan Conference of Teamsters Welfare Fund**
Minnesota and North Dakota Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers**
Mission Linen Supply
NFI Industries
Operating Engineers Local 835 Health and Welfare Fund
Opportunity Resources, Inc. Health and Welfare Plan
Orange County AHRC* **
Orscheln Industries
Pacific Risk Management**
Pearson Candy Company
Pinnacle PRM**
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 430 Health and Welfare Fund**
Progressive Logistics Services**
Pure Air Filter Sales & Service**
Rancho Maria PRM**
Reiter Affiliated Companies**
Retail, Wholesale & Dept. Store Union Local 1034 Welfare Fund
Rio Farms PRM**
Sensient Technologies Corp.
Service Employees International Union Local 1 Cleveland Welfare Fund
SFN Group
Sheet Metal Workers Funds of Local Union 38**
SMWIA 28**
Southeast OBGYN, PC* **
Southern CA Pipe Trades Trust Fund
Southern Operators Health Fund**
Stonebridge Hospitality Associates**
Sun Healthcare Group, Inc.
Teamsters Local 522 Welfare Fund Roofers Division
Teamsters Local Union 72 Welfare Fund**
Telesis Management Corporation
Texas Carpenters and Millwrights Health and Welfare Fund
The Mentor Network
The Wada Farms, Inc.
The Wilks Group, Inc. dba Ashley Furniture Homestore
The Wright Travel Agency**
Town of Grand Island* **
Trans-System, Inc.
True Leaf Farms**
UFCW Local 371 Amalgamated Welfare Fund**
United Crafts Benefits Fund**
United Food & Commercial Workers Unions and Employers Local No. 348 Health & Welfare Fund**
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1445 New Hampshire
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1459 and Contributing Employers Health and Welfare Fund**
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 464a**
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 911**
Varsity Contractors, Inc.
Waffle House
Weckworth Manufacturing**
Western Express, Inc.
Western Harvesting PRM Health Plan**
WG Yates and Sons Construction Company**
World Class Automotive**
Yukon-Kuskokwim Health Corporation**
Alaska Pipe Trade U.A. Local 367 Health and Security Trust**
Amalgamated National Health Fund
American Farms, PRM Health Plan**
American Growers Cooling, PRM Health Plan**
AUTO, LP, dba AutoInc. Health Benefit Plan**
Better Way Partners, LLC**
Big Valley Labor, PRM Health Plan**
CB Harvesting, PRM Health Plan**
City of Rockwall**
Cocopah Nurseries, Inc.
Express Harvesting, PRM Health Plan**
Fallen Oak Packing, PRM Health Plan**
FirstCarolinaCare Insurance Company on behalf of Longworth Industries
Foot Locker, Inc.**
Fresh Express
G&H Farms, PRM Health Plan**
Gill Ranch, PRM Health Plan**
Gill Transport, PRM Health Plan**
Gills Onions, PRM Health Plan**
Green Valley Farm Supply, PRM Health Plan**
Greencroft Communities
Growers Express, PRM Health Plan**
Hall Management Group, Inc.**
IH Services**
Independent Group Home Living Program, Inc.
King City Nursery, PRM Health Plan**
Meijer Health Benefits Plan/Primary Care Option
Mission Ranches, PRM Health Plan**
Moore's Retread & Tire of the Ark-La-Tex, Inc.
NOITU Insurance Trust Fund**
Payroll Solutions
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local No. 630 Welfare Fund
Seco Packing
Transcorr
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1000
United Wire, Metal & Machine Health & Welfare Fund**
Western Growers Assurance Trust
Wisconsin United Food & Commercial Workers Unions and Employers Health Plan**
1199SEIU Greater New York Benefit Fund
A. Duda & Sons, Inc.
Adecco Group, Inc.
Biomedic Corporation
Buffets, Inc.
Carington Health System
Cleveland Bakers Teamsters
Club Chef LLC
Columbia Sussex Mgmt, LLC
CRST International Inc.
Darr Equipment, Co.
DC Cement Masons Welfare Fund
Deaconess Long Term Care
Diamond Comic Distributors, Inc.
ECOM Atlantic, Inc.
FW Walton, Inc.
G4S Secure Solutions
GC Services, L.P. & First Community Bancshares, Inc.
Guardsmark, LLC
Indiana Teamsters Health Benefits Fund
Knox County Association for Retarded Citizens
Laundry and Dry Cleaning Workers Local No. 52
Mars Super Markets, Inc.
MPS Group, Inc.
Nexion Health
Noodles & Company
Pharmaca Integrative Pharmacy
Quality Integrated Services, Inc.
RE Rabalais Constructors, LTD
RREMC LLC
Security Forces Inc.
Shirkey Nursing
Social Service Employees Union Local 371
Spindle, Cooling, & Warehouse
Strauss Discount Auto
Sunburst Hospitality
Susser Holding Corp
Telescope Casual Furniture
Teletech Holdings, Inc.
The Brinkman Corporation
The LDF Companies
United Food and Commercial Workers Union (Mount Laurel, NJ)
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1459
Universal Orlando
Valley Services, Inc.
United Food and Commercial Workers and Participating Employers Interstate Health and Welfare Fund
Protocol Marketing Group
Sasnak
Star Tek
Adventist Care Centers
B.E.S.T of NY
Boskovich Farms, Inc
Café Enterprises, Inc.
Capital District Physicians
FleetPride, Inc.
Gallegos Corp
Hensley Industries, Inc.
Jeffords Steel and Engineering
Laborers' International Union of North America Local Union No. 616 Health and Welfare Plan
O.K. Industries
Service Employees Benefit Fund
Sun Pacific Farming Coop
SunWorld International, LLC
UFCW Allied Trade Health & Welfare Trust
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 1995
HCR Manor Care
IBEW No.915
Integra BMS for Culp, Inc.
New England Health Care Employees Welfare Fund †
Wiliamson-Dickie Manufacturing Company
Aegis Security Insurance Company †
Alliance One Tobacco
Asbestos Workers Local 53 Welfare Fund
Assurant Health (2nd Application)
Captain Elliot's Party Boats
Carlson Restaurants
CH Guenther & Son
CKM Industries dba Miller Environmental
Caribbean Workers' Voluntary Employees' Beneficiary Health and Welfare Plan †
Darden Restaurants
Duarte Nursery
Employees Security Fund
Florida Trowel Trades
Ingles Markets
Meijer
O'Reilly Auto Parts
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 123 Welfare Fund
Sun Belt
UFCW Local 227
Uncle Julio's
United Group
US Imaging
Vino Farms
AdvantaStaff, Inc. †
Agricare
Alaska Seafood
American Fidelity
Convergys
Darensberries
Gowan Company
Greystar
Macayo Restaurants
Periodical Services
UniFirst
Universal Forest Products
UFCW Maximus Local 455
American Habilitation Services, Inc. †
GuideStone Financial Resources
Local 25 SEIU
MAUSER Corp.
Preferred Care, Inc.
Ruby Tuesday
The Dixie Group, Inc.
UFCW Local 1262
Whelan Security Company
AMF Bowling Worldwide
Assisted Living Concepts
Case & Associates
GPM Investments
Grace Living Centers
Mountaire Corporation †
Swift Spinning
Belmont Village
Caliber Services
Cracker Barrel
DISH Network
Groendyke Transport, Inc
Pocono Medical Center
Regis Corporation
The Pictsweet Co.
Diversified Interiors
Local 802 Musicians Health Fund
MCS Life Insurance Company †
The Buccaneer
CIGNA
Greater Metropolitan Hotel
Local 17 Hospitality Benefit Fund
GSC-ILA
The Allied Industries Health Fund
Harden Healthcare
Vernon Sheltered Workshop, Inc. Health and Welfare Plan #501
I.U.P.A.T
Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.
Transport Workers
United Federation of Teachers Welfare Fund
Aegis
Aetna
Allflex
Baptist Retirement
BCS Insurance
Cryogenic
Fowler Packing Co.
Guy C. Lee Mfg.
HealthPort
Jack in the Box
Maritime Association
Maverick County
Metropolitan D.C. Paving Industry Employees Health and Welfare Fund
PMPS-ILA
PS-ILA
QK/DRD (Denny's)
Reliance Standard
Tri-Pak
United Agricultural Benefit Trust
 
2013-09-30 08:25:09 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


This is a case where you aren't entitled to your own facts. There was no atten
 
2013-09-30 08:25:37 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: So with single payer, there are no questions asked. You show up, you're ushered in, you get "the same high quality healhtcare" and you physician gets a check. Let's say that I'm unemployed, overweight, eat unhealthy food, smoke like a chimney, don't wear a seat belt etc etc etc...You feel that you are morally responsible to take care of me no questions asked.


As it stands, you go to the emergency room and they patch you up, they send you a bill you can't pay and the rest of us pay through higher hospital bills, either directly or by way of higher premiums.  Healing the patient properly will cost less in the end than putting out fires in the emergency room.

You may argue from moral hazard.  Moral hazard is a fine argument when speaking of speculators getting bailed out by the taxpayers, but it applies at most feebly to health care.  All the single payer in the world won't heal a damaged heart or get you out of a wheelchair.  Unhealthy lifestyles are still going to get you.
 
2013-09-30 08:26:09 PM
ts3.explicit.bing.net
whar my health care
 
2013-09-30 08:26:15 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


This seems to be your hang up. You think that repeal is a starting point for negotiation. It's not. Everyone knows it's not a starting point for negotiation. You're not going to convince anyone that it is.

Here, I'll offer to shoot you in the face in exchange for which you never speak in public again or participate in public forums in any way. Now you come back with a counter offer.
 
2013-09-30 08:27:22 PM

DamnYankees: Peter King is apparently leading a charge of House Moderates - PETER KING! This guy is now king of the moderates?!?!?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/359969/moderates-revolt-over-cr -j onathan-strong

King wants to pass a clean continuing-resolution bill. "This is going nowhere," he says about the standoff with Senate Democrats. "If Obamacare is as bad as we say it's going to be, then we should pick up a lot of seats in the next election and we should win the presidency in 2016," he says. "This idea of going through the side door to take something you lost through the front door - to me, it's wrong."


You're not mistaking him for that crayon-eating lunatic Steve King, are you? I keep doing that.
 
2013-09-30 08:28:37 PM

birdmanesq: feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.

This is a case where you aren't entitled to your own facts. There was no atten


Er.

There was no attempt made to "fix" Obamacare in those House votes. It was entirely a mission of destruction.

Fortunately our constitutional democracy doesn't work that way.

But, if course, the Tea Party hates the Constitution so they're forced to find ways to bypass normal legislative processes to extort concessions. "I didn't get my way? Fine. I'm coming back with a gun and asking again."

You should be f*cking ashamed of yourself that you are condoning this behavior.
 
2013-09-30 08:28:54 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Dancin_In_Anson: So with single payer, there are no questions asked. You show up, you're ushered in, you get "the same high quality healhtcare" and you physician gets a check. Let's say that I'm unemployed, overweight, eat unhealthy food, smoke like a chimney, don't wear a seat belt etc etc etc...You feel that you are morally responsible to take care of me no questions asked.

As it stands, you go to the emergency room and they patch you up, they send you a bill you can't pay and the rest of us pay through higher hospital bills, either directly or by way of higher premiums.  Healing the patient properly will cost less in the end than putting out fires in the emergency room.

You may argue from moral hazard.  Moral hazard is a fine argument when speaking of speculators getting bailed out by the taxpayers, but it applies at most feebly to health care.  All the single payer in the world won't heal a damaged heart or get you out of a wheelchair.  Unhealthy lifestyles are still going to get you.


Funny when I couldn't pay they sent me to collections, ruined my credit score, and threatened to sue. Maybe its because I'm white.
 
2013-09-30 08:29:27 PM

SlothB77: I like how the spin is the government shutdown will tank the economy, but as employers slash worker hours to avoid Obamacare, that health care law isn't going to tank the economy.

Spinning, spinning.


Yet we've had dozens of shut down in the past, some for weeks at a time. All that is required is the Senate to agree to delay this law that is causing those employers to cut hours. Heck Obama unilaterally delayed parts of it himeslf (if he can legally do that is another matter), yet the Senate through its leader Harry Reid calls it pointless and refuses to negotiate. They are hours away from a shutdown and the Senate Democrats aren't burning the midnight oil.

The Democrats did manage to tank a bill that would repeal the 2.3 % medical device tax that will cost consumers and hurt medical R&D in this country.
 
2013-09-30 08:29:43 PM

hasty ambush: List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.


So much text, and yet not a single citation.
 
2013-09-30 08:29:48 PM
Why won't the democrats just compromise on a repeal of obamacare?

Or, in bizarro-world, why does the American public keep voting for politicians that support obamacare if everyone wants it repealed?

The politicians that want obamacare repealed are a minority because the American public has already spoken. No take backs.
 
2013-09-30 08:29:52 PM

hasty ambush: List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.

[snip]


1) Citation needed.
2) If you've already got health care that meets the requirements of the ACA, you don't need no stinkin' exemption.
 
2013-09-30 08:32:23 PM

feckingmorons: The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


Here's a question: If Harry Reid (who controls all business in the Senate) said that he would further no bills and hear no amendments until the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has prosecutorial authority over all banks and hedge funds over a certain size, and could audit, at will, any financial institution, and the Republicans refused, so that no bills were passed and the government was forced into a shutdown, would you view this as a legitimate negotiation tactic by the Democrats?

If the Democrats offered to reduce their demands to just having the at-will auditing, and the Republicans refused, would you blame the Republicans for not willing to negotiate?
 
2013-09-30 08:32:31 PM
I would like dinner.

One friend suggested a steak. Another friend suggested a bowl of shiat. The compromise is not a shiat covered hamburger
 
2013-09-30 08:32:49 PM
 
2013-09-30 08:33:32 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: mediablitz: Ah, the old "forced" crybaby argumentWhat happens if you don't follow the law...any law?


By that logic, I am by extension "forced" to not murder you in your sleep.

Right now, I really  really  really  really  really REALLY want to do so, because of how badly you're arguing at present.  Seriously, it hurts.  It should be considered assault.  It's that bad.
 
2013-09-30 08:33:43 PM

feckingmorons: Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.

What do I get in return, a continuing resolution to fund the government? OK you've got a deal.


Why won't you compromise?  This intransigence will not stand!  Let it be known that I very generously compromised with you but you haven't yet compromised with me.  As a further sign of my good faith, I will knock it down to 5 months of TF for me.  Just buy me 5 months and we'll call it square!
 
2013-09-30 08:34:25 PM
The Senate has already announced they are going to flip this stupid bill back to the House in less than an hour.
 
2013-09-30 08:36:23 PM
9 GOP no votes so far. Every time they vote they get more no votes.
 
2013-09-30 08:36:34 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: TuteTibiImperes: No, I think the government should appoint a panel of medical professionals to make those decisions

So you will willingly give control of decisions that affect your healthcare to some panel of professionals. It's ok though, because you live a healthy lifestyle so it really won't affect you in any way...it's the people like that guy over there that will be culled.


Is...is that really a "Death Panels" argument?? Really? Damn.
 
2013-09-30 08:36:37 PM
In exchange for the debt ceiling passage, the democrats should offer to repeal obamacare in its entirety and lower the Medicare qualifying age to 18.

That sounds like a compromise right up the GOP's alley. Obamacare completely repealed and the debt ceiling passage.
 
2013-09-30 08:36:57 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: I agree with you a lot of times but this time I truly believe the GOPs brinksmanship is detrimental and childish.


No, i agree with that.
 
2013-09-30 08:37:08 PM
If we delayed oObama care for a year right now, what would they want for the debt ceiling to get raised anyways? What do they want next year? Why would you think for a second they wouldn't continue to ask for Year delays forever and threaten to tank shiat if they ddon't get it? I mean hell at some point if aca is going to happens the dems had to say nope, not delaying it get farked. Why not now?
 
2013-09-30 08:37:32 PM

DamnYankees: The Senate has already announced they are going to flip this stupid bill back to the House in less than an hour.


Good
 
2013-09-30 08:38:20 PM
12 GOP nos so far, 16 left to vote...
 
2013-09-30 08:39:07 PM

bulldg4life: In exchange for the debt ceiling passage, the democrats should offer to repeal obamacare in its entirety and lower the Medicare qualifying age to 18.

That sounds like a compromise right up the GOP's alley. Obamacare completely repealed and the debt ceiling passage.


Heh. Yes.
 
2013-09-30 08:39:14 PM

hasty ambush: List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.


hahaha.  that's when you know you have a good law.  when all those need exemptions.
 
2013-09-30 08:39:46 PM

bulldg4life: In exchange for the debt ceiling passage, the democrats should offer to repeal obamacare in its entirety and lower the Medicare qualifying age to 18.



that would require two things, one, the democrats would have to actually be a party of leftists, and two, they would have to actually have a spine/set of balls.
 
2013-09-30 08:42:19 PM

SlothB77: hasty ambush: List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.

hahaha.  that's when you know you have a good law.  when all those need exemptions.


Wait - you actually believe that nonsense?
 
2013-09-30 08:43:08 PM

peasandcarrots: Make no mistake; the Republicans are definitely negotiating in bad faith


They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years. Any one of those could have been the start of compromise and negotiation but the Senate each and every time said no. I don't see how you can say the House is negotiating in bad faith. There is no duplicity or deception, the year delay will allow the House to again vote to repeal Obamacare and piecemeal repeal the malodorous parts of it that haven't been done away with yet. The 1099 thing was so unpopular with businesses that the Democrats agreed to repeal that, The CO-OP program was repealed on a bipartisan basis.

The horrible increases in withholding taxes and lax eligibility requirements were repealed with another bill from the House that the Senate agreed to and President Obama signed. The CLASS program that was a colossal and expensive failure was repealed.

These are the parts I can recall, think of what else is in this bloated, overreaching law. Racial preferences in medical school admissions - did you know that was in there? The Anti-conscience mandate - if as a Jew you are opposed to euthanasia you can be required to fund it as an employer.

The law sets up more than 150 new rule making bodies. Don't we have enough of those already? The law imposes a tax on people who won't get insurance, but we've been told time and time again that the IRS won't enforce this because Obamacare does not allow them to proceed with civil or criminal penalties (if you get a refund they can take it from that, but if no refund it just stays on the books until you do).

This law was written by 1000 lawyers with 1000 typewriters. It is bad law, sure there are a few good things in it, but the bad things far outweigh them.
 
2013-09-30 08:43:12 PM
Congress can't even count to potato.

We're all farked.
 
2013-09-30 08:44:09 PM

SlothB77: hasty ambush: List of Obamacare exemptions, no you are not on it.

hahaha.  that's when you know you have a good law.  when all those need exemptions.


reads like fwd:fwd:fwd:fwd:farkpost:fwd:fwd it probably just means their current insurance is acceptable under the law, like mine, I was also "exempted".
 
2013-09-30 08:45:51 PM
Josh Barro @jbarro
Reid quotes Einstein: Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Republicans "have lost their minds."
 
2013-09-30 08:46:50 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: Because we as a society have decided that health care is something we all pay for.

How much do you think you should be forced to pay for my heathcare?


No man is an island,
Entire of itself,
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thy friend's
Or of thine own were:
Any man's death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; 
It tolls for thee.
 
2013-09-30 08:47:36 PM
It's just not fair that the democrats won't compromise on repeal! Those bastards.
 
2013-09-30 08:49:21 PM

realmolo: Dancin In Anson is a typical conservative idiot. There is no social contract in their mind. You pay your way, or you die. Because...who-the-fark-knows.

He's a sociopath, basically. Again, like most conservatives.


I don't think Republicans are sociopaths, but it's clear that they think that government should be sociopathic, instead of compassionate, on the off chance that there's someone out there that doesn't want to be compassionate.

However, since we have a government Of The People, etc., we have a government that reflects the will of the compassionate. We want welfare, we want Medicare, we want Social Security, because we elect people who, like us, don't want to chuck the destitute into the cold and don't have the power to act individually.

Conservatives don't want that to be the role of government because they see it as a power grab. Which, when they tell you that they believe that largesse should be in the hands of private organizations and churches, kind of tells you who they want running your life...
 
2013-09-30 08:49:50 PM
haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??
 
2013-09-30 08:50:01 PM

hasty ambush: White House Obamacare Delay: Out-Of-Pocket Caps Waived Until 2015

Administration Delays Obamacare Employer Mandate


Democrats oppose delay of individual mandate?????


So you're saying that Obama and the democrats have already compromised on obamacare?

Then what's the hold up, pass a cr already!
 
2013-09-30 08:50:26 PM

feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years. Any one of those could have been the start of compromise and negotiation but the Senate each and every time said no.


And in not one of those bills did the Republicans show any interest in compromising, it was for show and everybody knew it. I don't know you think it's the Democrats' responsibility to go "hey, we have what we want out of this bill, but they're clearly unhappy, so let's see what parts we can live without to make them happy." If the Republicans had specific issues they wanted to debate (note: "All of it" does not qualify as a specific point) then they could have introduced narrow bills to that effect. They have not done so, because there isn't a specific part they particularly don't like. They don't like that it might succeed, so they are trying anything they can to make sure it fails in any way they can.
 
2013-09-30 08:51:31 PM

bulldg4life: It's just not fair that the democrats won't compromise on repeal! Those bastards.


They could play the reasonable negotiation card if they hadn't taken the position from day one that the law needed to be repealed in its entirety.

I mean one of the things that made Romney look so ludicrous was his "repeal and replace" thing with absolutely no suggestion as to what it would be replaced with.
 
2013-09-30 08:52:33 PM

birdmanesq: bulldg4life: It's just not fair that the democrats won't compromise on repeal! Those bastards.

They could play the reasonable negotiation card if they hadn't taken the position from day one that the law needed to be repealed in its entirety.

I mean one of the things that made Romney look so ludicrous was his "repeal and replace" thing with absolutely no suggestion as to what it would be replaced with.


At this point, they think a year-long delay instead of repealing it IS the concession.
 
2013-09-30 08:52:50 PM

Fellate O'Fish: haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??


enjoy your vacation
 
2013-09-30 08:57:22 PM

haywatchthis: Fellate O'Fish: haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??

enjoy your vacation


Wait a tic.

On the Politics Tab the racists don't get vacations, but the people who call out racists do? It really is bizarro world over here.
 
2013-09-30 08:58:05 PM

haywatchthis: Fellate O'Fish: haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??

enjoy your vacation


Wait, making correct observations about someones post is grounds for vacation time? That must be pretty new, since I still see replies to DIA and the guy who must have 2 personalities, both of less than average intelligence, up there.
 
2013-09-30 08:58:15 PM

feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.


and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.
 
2013-09-30 09:01:08 PM

birdmanesq: birdmanesq: feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.

This is a case where you aren't entitled to your own facts. There was no atten

Er.

There was no attempt made to "fix" Obamacare in those House votes. It was entirely a mission of destruction.

Fortunately our constitutional democracy doesn't work that way.

But, if course, the Tea Party hates the Constitution so they're forced to find ways to bypass normal legislative processes to extort concessions. "I didn't get my way? Fine. I'm coming back with a gun and asking again."

You should be f*cking ashamed of yourself that you are condoning this behavior.


Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare. I'm sure you've conveniently forgotten that the Obamacare bill started out as a completely different appropriations bill (as it was an appropriations bill it had to originate in the house) H.R. 3590, the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009 by Charlie Rangel ( an admitted tax cheat). It was about servicemembers and taxes.

You can't in good conscience tell me that if they could turn something about military members housing and taxes into Obamacare they could not have used one of the 40+ repeal bills to compromise.

Bypassing normal legislative process, don't give me that nonsense either, this is in no way bypassing the normal legislative process. Conversely Rep.Alcee Hastings (impeached and removed former federal Judge) was giddy about making up the rules as they want along passing Obamacare by reconciliation - a process never before used and absolutely not designed for the artifice, subterfuge and chicanery used by the Democrats to pass Obamacare.

If anyone has dirty hands it is not the Republicans. I should be ashamed of myself? Really? Refute what I just said and lets see who is ashamed.
 
2013-09-30 09:02:03 PM

birdmanesq: haywatchthis: Fellate O'Fish: haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??

enjoy your vacation

Wait a tic.

On the Politics Tab the racists don't get vacations, but the people who call out racists do? It really is bizarro world over here.


maybe, the racist guy might take what the other guy said as trolling other farkers, so the racist guy might have alerted the mods, not sure if the mods will side with the racist guy but ya never know...
 
2013-09-30 09:04:32 PM

nmrsnr: And in not one of those bills did the Republicans show any interest in compromising, it was for show and everybody knew it.


List one of them which they passed back with amendments or negotiated in conference.
 
2013-09-30 09:05:10 PM

haywatchthis: [ts3.explicit.bing.net image 201x300]
whar my health care


I'll give you a 3/10. There's better racist trolls around here, so you'll have to step your game up if you want to join the big leagues.
 
2013-09-30 09:05:59 PM
haywatchthis
enjoy your vacation

Well, bless your heart.
 
2013-09-30 09:06:53 PM
 
2013-09-30 09:08:06 PM

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: And in not one of those bills did the Republicans show any interest in compromising, it was for show and everybody knew it.

List one of them which they passed back with amendments or negotiated in conference.


I see you stopped reading after my first sentence, so I'll repost what I wrote, where I ask why it should be incumbent on the Democrats to initiate negotiations:

I don't know you think it's the Democrats' responsibility to go "hey, we have what we want out of this bill, but they're clearly unhappy, so let's see what parts we can live without to make them happy." If the Republicans had specific issues they wanted to debate (note: "All of it" does not qualify as a specific point) then they could have introduced narrow bills to that effect. They have not done so, because there isn't a specific part they particularly don't like. They don't like that it might succeed, so they are trying anything they can to make sure it fails in any way they can.
 
2013-09-30 09:08:42 PM

Headso: birdmanesq: haywatchthis: Fellate O'Fish: haywatchthis
whar my health care

Wow, someone whose profile says that they're from Alabama made a racist post.  What are the odds??

enjoy your vacation

Wait a tic.

On the Politics Tab the racists don't get vacations, but the people who call out racists do? It really is bizarro world over here.

maybe, the racist guy might take what the other guy said as trolling other farkers, so the racist guy might have alerted the mods, not sure if the mods will side with the racist guy but ya never know...


So the racist guy gets told that he is racist and then a joke gets made about the racist guy's state being full of slack-jawed racists and that constitutes trolling?

Well, it's one thing to be a racist asshole, but it's quite another to be a racist asshole with such thin skin that you feel the need to run and tattle any time your racist feelings get hurt. Interesting.
 
paj
2013-09-30 09:09:31 PM
pbs.twimg.com
 
2013-09-30 09:09:32 PM

Headso: feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.

and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.


Call me a joker, call me a fool, but I think this would be a perfect time for the Senate to reveal a sweeping repeal bill of Obamacare that dismantles every provision and postpones every measure, watch the House jump at it, and then open it up and read:

"The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed and replaced with a comprehensive single-payer system, the details of which are as follows:"

Well, they want it repealed and replaced. How badly do they want it repealed and replaced?
 
2013-09-30 09:10:18 PM

kasmel: feckingmorons:

You were derping?  http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-09-30/the-government-shutdo w n-is-john-boehners-fault?campaign_id=yhoo


Probably a cousin of mine judging from the name.

I'm no huge fan of Mr. Boehner.
 
2013-09-30 09:13:43 PM
Hmmmm... the post count keeps going down.
 
2013-09-30 09:14:40 PM

peasandcarrots: Headso: feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.

and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.

Call me a joker, call me a fool, but I think this would be a perfect time for the Senate to reveal a sweeping repeal bill of Obamacare that dismantles every provision and postpones every measure, watch the House jump at it, and then open it up and read:

"The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed and replaced with a comprehensive single-payer system, the details of which are as follows:"

Well, they want it repealed and replaced. How badly do they want it repealed and replaced?



If you think you can set up single payer in a year or two (or ten for that matter) and still have hospitals and physicians I'll vote for you.
 
2013-09-30 09:15:01 PM

feckingmorons: Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare


Okay, let's take one of those loyalty oaths described as a bill, strip out the derp , and add an amendment that reworks the individual mandate to a public option plus system where those who did not find their own insurance on the exchanges would be enrolled in Medicaid-E (other people could sign on as well).  You want to negotiate on that?
 
2013-09-30 09:16:15 PM

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: And in not one of those bills did the Republicans show any interest in compromising, it was for show and everybody knew it.

List one of them which they passed back with amendments or negotiated in conference.


That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing, or we all go down the drain" is an ultimatum, not a negotiations starting point. For someone as concerned about coercion as you seem to be, you actually believe that it's an appropriate opener for conversation.

A negotiations starting point would look more like, "Here are my provisions. Do you have any provisions?"

If you use the language of absolutism and ultimatum, you really need to stop being surprised when people see you as an uncompromising absolutist.
 
2013-09-30 09:16:30 PM

nmrsnr: why it should be incumbent on the Democrats to initiate negotiations:


They didn't. The House sent them the bill, they make changes and send it back. Simply saying no is not negotiating.

Look at the back and forth on the last CR and you'll see how they negotiated, the Senate didn't just say NO! and go home for the weekend.
 
2013-09-30 09:17:58 PM

peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,


You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.
 
2013-09-30 09:18:03 PM

feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: Headso: feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.

and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.

Call me a joker, call me a fool, but I think this would be a perfect time for the Senate to reveal a sweeping repeal bill of Obamacare that dismantles every provision and postpones every measure, watch the House jump at it, and then open it up and read:

"The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed and replaced with a comprehensive single-payer system, the details of which are as follows:"

Well, they want it repealed and replaced. How badly do they want it repealed and replaced?


If you think you can set up single payer in a year or two (or ten for that matter) and still have hospitals and physicians I'll vote for you.


like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.
 
2013-09-30 09:19:29 PM

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: why it should be incumbent on the Democrats to initiate negotiations:

They didn't. The House sent them the bill, they make changes and send it back. Simply saying no is not negotiating.

Look at the back and forth on the last CR and you'll see how they negotiated, the Senate didn't just say NO! and go home for the weekend.


Gee, I wonder what could have changed.  It wasn't like the House was led by a bunch of unreasonable loonies who kept moving the goalposts further and further to the right.
 
2013-09-30 09:19:54 PM

pueblonative: feckingmorons: Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare

Okay, let's take one of those loyalty oaths described as a bill, strip out the derp , and add an amendment that reworks the individual mandate to a public option plus system where those who did not find their own insurance on the exchanges would be enrolled in Medicaid-E (other people could sign on as well).  You want to negotiate on that?


Thankfully I have developed enough good sense never to run for or accept public office again. I think you want to give medicaid to people who don't get insurance at work or who don't sign up. Well that is not a terrible idea, but how do you weed out the people who simply can't be bothered to sign up because in the end if they simply don't do anything, FREE INSURANCE!
 
2013-09-30 09:19:56 PM

feckingmorons: They didn't. The House sent them the bill, they make changes and send it back. Simply saying no is not negotiating.


And saying "repeal the entire bill" is not an opening point of negotiation. Or, rather, it is as much a valid response as "repeal the entire bill" is a valid opening of negotiations. You can't say "Republicans just want to negotiate" when they started with "get rid of everything" but say that Democrats won't negotiate when they say "counter offer: we keep everything."
 
2013-09-30 09:20:09 PM

feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.


And you have no farking clue what a quid pro quo is, obviously.  If you did, you would see what the House is doing is producing ransom notes, not something that should be taken seriously by the Senate.  If there was any actual quid pro quo going on, they wouldn't be putting such batshiat crazy ideas in the CR bill to get it passed.

But I'm sure you already know that.
 
2013-09-30 09:21:15 PM

feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: Headso: feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.

and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.

Call me a joker, call me a fool, but I think this would be a perfect time for the Senate to reveal a sweeping repeal bill of Obamacare that dismantles every provision and postpones every measure, watch the House jump at it, and then open it up and read:

"The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed and replaced with a comprehensive single-payer system, the details of which are as follows:"

Well, they want it repealed and replaced. How badly do they want it repealed and replaced?


If you think you can set up single payer in a year or two (or ten for that matter) and still have hospitals and physicians I'll vote for you.


Where would they go?  Canada and the UK already have single payer systems, Australia has a pseudo-single payer system, so it's not like they could run off to another English speaking country to practice if they opposed single payer.  Plus, while cost controls absolutely should be implemented, and that may lower some wages, they'd still be making a very good living.  The success of the systems in Canada and the UK proves that single payer works.

Even better, open up more residency programs, and pay for the education of those willing to work in underserved and critical need areas for a number of years in return.   Put more doctors out there, the supply will bring down the salaries they can demand, and incentivize new doctors to work in areas that need them the most.

Also, give RNs, PAs, and NPs more power to do more without direct doctor supervision, and expand the things they're allowed to do in general.  Most routine ailments don't need a full fledged doctor to be diagnosed and treated successfully.
 
2013-09-30 09:21:31 PM

Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.


I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.
 
2013-09-30 09:21:37 PM

feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.


Except the CR isn't some kind of present for the Democrats; it's a required measure for the continuing functioning of government. That's where the coercion comes in.
 
2013-09-30 09:22:56 PM

nmrsnr: Or, rather, it "keep the entire bill" is as much a valid response as "repeal the entire bill" is a valid opening of negotiations.


Clarified that for me.
 
2013-09-30 09:23:41 PM

feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.


Congrats on being rich enough to buy private.  What do you want to do about those who aren't?
 
2013-09-30 09:24:06 PM

pueblonative: feckingmorons: nmrsnr: why it should be incumbent on the Democrats to initiate negotiations:

They didn't. The House sent them the bill, they make changes and send it back. Simply saying no is not negotiating.

Look at the back and forth on the last CR and you'll see how they negotiated, the Senate didn't just say NO! and go home for the weekend.

Gee, I wonder what could have changed.  It wasn't like the House was led by a bunch of unreasonable loonies who kept moving the goalposts further and further to the right.


I do think it was a lot like the House won't talk to the Senate.  The Senate won't talk to the House.  And Obama is throwing insults at one side instead of reaching out and at least trying to meet with everyone to air out their grievances.  We got the government we deserve.
 
2013-09-30 09:25:02 PM

Headso: feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: Headso: feckingmorons: They've given the Senate 40+ bills to repeal it over the last two years.

and replace it with nothing, so go back to the way it was when people with preexisting conditions couldn't get coverage and we all had to pick up the tab anyway because of the Hippocratic oath, why don't you pass a law that allows doctors to ignore that first and then move on to repealing obamacare.

Call me a joker, call me a fool, but I think this would be a perfect time for the Senate to reveal a sweeping repeal bill of Obamacare that dismantles every provision and postpones every measure, watch the House jump at it, and then open it up and read:

"The Affordable Care Act is hereby repealed and replaced with a comprehensive single-payer system, the details of which are as follows:"

Well, they want it repealed and replaced. How badly do they want it repealed and replaced?


If you think you can set up single payer in a year or two (or ten for that matter) and still have hospitals and physicians I'll vote for you.

like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.


Well, I really just meant it as a mental exercise. My emphasis was that if Obamacare is literally so hard to swallow that anything would be better, and single payer is part of the subset of "anything..."
 
2013-09-30 09:26:03 PM

feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.


instead we want a system where people still get coverage when they can't afford it ultimately paid by the taxpayer and insurance holders?
 
2013-09-30 09:26:26 PM

nmrsnr: nmrsnr: Or, rather, it "keep the entire bill" is as much a valid response as "repeal the entire bill" is a valid opening of negotiations.

Clarified that for me.


There are lots that need fixed in Obamacare to make it work as advertised.  But you are right, neither side is looking at fixing.  They are looking at all or nothing.  From the perspective of the Senate...they do nothing and it stays, so why talk?  From the House, why bargain when we can hold it all hostage...which they can't because even with a shut down the White House decides who is essential personnel in the government and it still becomes law tomorrow...more law...more better law
 
2013-09-30 09:27:03 PM
Senate is already voting now to fling this turd back.
 
2013-09-30 09:27:57 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Also, give RNs, PAs, and NPs more power to do more without direct doctor supervision, and expand the things they're allowed to do in general.  Most routine ailments don't need a full fledged doctor to be diagnosed and treated successfully.


I'd rather see the worst physician than the best RN, and I am one of the best RNs.

My friend Rick who was an ER doc gave up his private practice to go to the ER, seven years later he quit that to fish for a living. He is much happier.

My friend Steve is an orthopedic surgeon, he pays $4 an hour, every hour of every day for all the insurance (all lines) his practice requires. He wishes he had done something else, but medical school really only prepares you for one thing. He is getting an executive MBA and going into consulting in a few years when he sells his practice to "Some idealistic SOB."

People simply won't go into medicine. Obamacare cuts reimbursements (I have no idea why they use that word when they mean payments, they are not reimbursing anyone they are paying doctors for their work).

Would you want to get paid $57.30 for an office visit from a commercial plan, $75 from a guy who pays cash, or $12,91 from medicare? The government funded rates are going down. Would you see patients for 1/6 of your value, would you see them at a net loss? Name a physician - not employed or affiliated with the government who still really sees patients in his own practice- who is in favor of Obamacare and I'll eat my hat.
 
2013-09-30 09:28:59 PM

feckingmorons: pueblonative: feckingmorons: Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare

Okay, let's take one of those loyalty oaths described as a bill, strip out the derp , and add an amendment that reworks the individual mandate to a public option plus system where those who did not find their own insurance on the exchanges would be enrolled in Medicaid-E (other people could sign on as well).  You want to negotiate on that?

Thankfully I have developed enough good sense never to run for or accept public office again. I think you want to give medicaid to people who don't get insurance at work or who don't sign up. Well that is not a terrible idea, but how do you weed out the people who simply can't be bothered to sign up because in the end if they simply don't do anything, FREE INSURANCE!


Who mentioned "free"?   You can charge them on their tax returns (and give it a little more teeth by saying that your property can have a lien attached to it as with any other tax debt) OR you can do actual deductions on their paycheck based upon their rate of pay from the last year and send them an EOB and a health coverage card.  If they want out of it they produce proof of their own coverage.  Also, if you do have coverage and drop it during the year, you have a set period of time to pick up coverage or you're enrolled as of that date.
 
2013-09-30 09:29:23 PM

I_C_Weener: which they can't because even with a shut down the White House decides who is essential personnel in the government and it still becomes law tomorrow...more law...more better law


Which is why this whole thing is mind-bogglingly stupid.
 
2013-09-30 09:31:07 PM

12349876: feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.

Congrats on being rich enough to buy private.  What do you want to do about those who aren't?


They get the HSE in Ireland, I had supplemental private cover BUPA. I think it was about $800/yr
 
2013-09-30 09:31:26 PM

feckingmorons: People simply won't go into medicine


Yes, this is why Europe has no doctors. Only shamanistic apothecaries.
 
2013-09-30 09:32:17 PM

feckingmorons: Name a physician - not employed or affiliated with the government who still really sees patients in his own practice- who is in favor of Obamacare and I'll eat my hat.


not every physician is in it for the money. well orthopedists are, but not all the rest of them.
 
2013-09-30 09:32:30 PM
31.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-09-30 09:32:36 PM

I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: nmrsnr: Or, rather, it "keep the entire bill" is as much a valid response as "repeal the entire bill" is a valid opening of negotiations.

Clarified that for me.

There are lots that need fixed in Obamacare to make it work as advertised.  But you are right, neither side is looking at fixing.  They are looking at all or nothing.  From the perspective of the Senate...they do nothing and it stays, so why talk?  From the House, why bargain when we can hold it all hostage...which they can't because even with a shut down the White House decides who is essential personnel in the government and it still becomes law tomorrow...more law...more better law


See you're way too smart for this garbage.

Where do you see the political will in the House to make any fixes? The reason you're not seeing patch bills come out of the Senate is because they're DOA in the House where the majority only wants to repeal.

This "plague on both their houses" stuff is really bunk in this context. The Republicans in the House are absolutists when it comes to Obamacare repeal.

The Senate and the President can hardly be blamed for their frostiness given the present climate in the House Republican caucus. It's like Israel being faulted for just not being a little more reasonable with Iran.
 
2013-09-30 09:33:35 PM

DamnYankees: Yes, this is why Europe has no doctors. Only shamanistic apothecaries.


Yeah, it's really cheap, but "ooh-ee-ooh-ah-ah ting, tang, walla-walla bing-bang" only did so much for my herniated disc.
 
2013-09-30 09:33:57 PM

pueblonative: feckingmorons: pueblonative: feckingmorons: Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare

Okay, let's take one of those loyalty oaths described as a bill, strip out the derp , and add an amendment that reworks the individual mandate to a public option plus system where those who did not find their own insurance on the exchanges would be enrolled in Medicaid-E (other people could sign on as well).  You want to negotiate on that?

Thankfully I have developed enough good sense never to run for or accept public office again. I think you want to give medicaid to people who don't get insurance at work or who don't sign up. Well that is not a terrible idea, but how do you weed out the people who simply can't be bothered to sign up because in the end if they simply don't do anything, FREE INSURANCE!

Who mentioned "free"?   You can charge them on their tax returns (and give it a little more teeth by saying that your property can have a lien attached to it as with any other tax debt) OR you can do actual deductions on their paycheck based upon their rate of pay from the last year and send them an EOB and a health coverage card.  If they want out of it they produce proof of their own coverage.  Also, if you do have coverage and drop it during the year, you have a set period of time to pick up coverage or you're enrolled as of that date.


You mentioned free, you said Medicaid. What you're describing now is almost exactly what Obamacare is.

/an EOB is explaination of benefits - a medical claim response. You're thinking of a SPD - summary plan description.
// not a knock, I just knew the difference and thought I'd pass it along.
 
2013-09-30 09:34:39 PM

I_C_Weener: I do think it was a lot like the House won't talk to the Senate. The Senate won't talk to the House. And Obama is throwing insults at one side instead of reaching out and at least trying to meet with everyone to air out their grievances. We got the government we deserve.


No, Obama has realized that playing the good guy when the Repubs have abso-farking-lutely no intention of negotiating in good faith won't work.  Period.  He doesn't have another election to worry about. He can drop the hammer and let the GOP get their faces bashed in in the midterms.  Plus, we'll have one year of Obamacare which will make their opposition look even more teatarded than usual.
 
2013-09-30 09:34:45 PM

feckingmorons: 12349876: feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.

Congrats on being rich enough to buy private.  What do you want to do about those who aren't?

They get the HSE in Ireland, I had supplemental private cover BUPA. I think it was about $800/yr


I was talking about YOUR IDEAL plan.  You think that single payer sucks and I'm happy you got to avoid it because you're rich, what do you want to do about the poor?
 
2013-09-30 09:36:11 PM

hasty ambush: [31.media.tumblr.com image 300x300]


Please tell me you don't honestly believe congress is exempt from the ACA. They negotiate for their healthcare coverage just like every other large business in America, and have their employer contribute to their health insurance premiums, just like every employee in America.
 
2013-09-30 09:37:41 PM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-09-30 09:37:53 PM

DamnYankees: feckingmorons: People simply won't go into medicine

Yes, this is why Europe has no doctors. Only shamanistic apothecaries.


Would you go for heart surgery in Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK? They may have brilliant doctors, but the facilities are certainly not as numerous or as well staffed, sanitary or modern as ours. Even the Royal College or Nurses admits the nurses are overworked and understaffed and amazingly they're not a union.
 
2013-09-30 09:39:35 PM

FlashHarry: feckingmorons: Name a physician - not employed or affiliated with the government who still really sees patients in his own practice- who is in favor of Obamacare and I'll eat my hat.

not every physician is in it for the money. well orthopedists are, but not all the rest of them.


Anethesiologists are purely about the money...and free drugs....mostly the money though.
 
2013-09-30 09:41:52 PM

12349876: feckingmorons: 12349876: feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.

Congrats on being rich enough to buy private.  What do you want to do about those who aren't?

They get the HSE in Ireland, I had supplemental private cover BUPA. I think it was about $800/yr

I was talking about YOUR IDEAL plan.  You think that single payer sucks and I'm happy you got to avoid it because you're rich, what do you want to do about the poor?


based on his posts he wants them to be covered as they were in the past using taxpayer money and insurance holder money he just wants to do it in the most expensive way possible by using the ER as a primary care facility for the poor instead of mandating they get insurance and providing subsidies.
 
2013-09-30 09:42:10 PM

nmrsnr: hasty ambush: [31.media.tumblr.com image 300x300]

Please tell me you don't honestly believe congress is exempt from the ACA. They negotiate for their healthcare coverage just like every other large business in America, and have their employer contribute to their health insurance premiums, just like every employee in America.


Oh my do you actually believe this? The FEHB is not Obamacare. That is true, but there are no Congressmen calling around to get the best rates from Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule. As such they are exempt from finding other MEC as the coverage provided through their (and more than 9 million other federal employees) is exempt.
 
2013-09-30 09:42:32 PM

nmrsnr: DamnYankees: Yes, this is why Europe has no doctors. Only shamanistic apothecaries.

Yeah, it's really cheap, but "ooh-ee-ooh-ah-ah ting, tang, walla-walla bing-bang" only did so much for my herniated disc.


Yes, but Love Potion #9 cleared up my zitses...
 
2013-09-30 09:43:18 PM

feckingmorons: pueblonative: feckingmorons: pueblonative: feckingmorons: Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare

Okay, let's take one of those loyalty oaths described as a bill, strip out the derp , and add an amendment that reworks the individual mandate to a public option plus system where those who did not find their own insurance on the exchanges would be enrolled in Medicaid-E (other people could sign on as well).  You want to negotiate on that?

Thankfully I have developed enough good sense never to run for or accept public office again. I think you want to give medicaid to people who don't get insurance at work or who don't sign up. Well that is not a terrible idea, but how do you weed out the people who simply can't be bothered to sign up because in the end if they simply don't do anything, FREE INSURANCE!

Who mentioned "free"?   You can charge them on their tax returns (and give it a little more teeth by saying that your property can have a lien attached to it as with any other tax debt) OR you can do actual deductions on their paycheck based upon their rate of pay from the last year and send them an EOB and a health coverage card.  If they want out of it they produce proof of their own coverage.  Also, if you do have coverage and drop it during the year, you have a set period of time to pick up coverage or you're enrolled as of that date.

You mentioned free, you said Medicaid. What you're describing now is almost exactly what Obamacare is.

/an EOB is explaination of benefits - a medical claim response. You're thinking of a SPD - summary plan description.
// not a knock, I just knew the difference and thought I'd pass it along.


My mistake on the acronyms

Almost, but there are differences.  Major one is that with Obamacare even if you pay the penalty you have no insurance.  This would make sure that the ones who didn't get the insurance would have some protection.  You'd probably have to up the premiums (or raise income taxes), but they would be covered by something.

Back to the point:  let's say the Senate did that with one of these 40+ "we hatez the Obamacare, yes we do" Gollum bills.  Do you reasonably expect the Repubs to come anywhere near this type of proposal?
 
2013-09-30 09:44:27 PM

birdmanesq: This "plague on both their houses" stuff is really bunk in this context. The Republicans in the House are absolutists when it comes to Obamacare repeal.


And the Senate is blind to the need to tweak.  They have the option to fix some of these issues too.  But they don't.  Its not an impasse because of one side only.  That's pure PR spin.  They both are to blame here.

Its not exactly bsabsvr, but the Senate is content to let it stand without change, and to continue with increased spending.  What do they care, they don't need to worry for 6 years.
 
2013-09-30 09:46:08 PM

I_C_Weener: birdmanesq: This "plague on both their houses" stuff is really bunk in this context. The Republicans in the House are absolutists when it comes to Obamacare repeal.

And the Senate is blind to the need to tweak.  They have the option to fix some of these issues too.  But they don't.  Its not an impasse because of one side only.  That's pure PR spin.  They both are to blame here.

Its not exactly bsabsvr, but the Senate is content to let it stand without change, and to continue with increased spending.  What do they care, they don't need to worry for 6 years.


Bullshiat.  The House GOP needs to cut their infantile bullshiat and pass a clean CR.
 
2013-09-30 09:48:26 PM

I_C_Weener: birdmanesq: This "plague on both their houses" stuff is really bunk in this context. The Republicans in the House are absolutists when it comes to Obamacare repeal.

And the Senate is blind to the need to tweak.  They have the option to fix some of these issues too.  But they don't.  Its not an impasse because of one side only.  That's pure PR spin.  They both are to blame here.

Its not exactly bsabsvr, but the Senate is content to let it stand without change, and to continue with increased spending.  What do they care, they don't need to worry for 6 years.


Um, a third of the senate is up for election each year.  Nice try, though.  The law has been passed, signed, and upheld.  Repubs throwing a hissy fit and threatening one of their basic functions is only going to help the Dems, particularly when the Repubs are engaging in an internal purge/civil war of anybody who doesn't tow the line.
 
2013-09-30 09:49:09 PM
pueblonative:
Um, a third of the senate is up for election each year.

*two years.
 
2013-09-30 09:50:22 PM

Headso: 12349876: feckingmorons: 12349876: feckingmorons: Headso: like the all the other nations with single payer? The real naivety in his post is thinking there's actually a party in power that would offer that as a solution.

I've lived in a country with single payer. I still got insurance so I could go to private hospitals and doctors. Single payer is not something we really want I don't think.

Congrats on being rich enough to buy private.  What do you want to do about those who aren't?

They get the HSE in Ireland, I had supplemental private cover BUPA. I think it was about $800/yr

I was talking about YOUR IDEAL plan.  You think that single payer sucks and I'm happy you got to avoid it because you're rich, what do you want to do about the poor?

based on his posts he wants them to be covered as they were in the past using taxpayer money and insurance holder money he just wants to do it in the most expensive way possible by using the ER as a primary care facility for the poor instead of mandating they get insurance and providing subsidies.


I would really appreciate if you didn't presume to know how I would answer.

There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.

Those who can't work because of disability are now provided for through medicare,medicaid, and state plans. Some smaller jurisdictions also have plans for others who aren't working.

Employers could previously offer mini-med plans with annual caps of perhaps $100K which is fine for 99% of those workers, the other few who exceed their cap can transfer to medicaid.

Yes, there will still be some involuntarily uninsured people, and we should have a solution that addresses that, preferably by finding them a good job with insurance. Obamacare is not creating jobs and not insuring those who are uninsured, unemployed and ineligible for medicaid or medicare either. Look at the Obamacare site for a 30 year old drunkard who isn't eligible for medicare or medicaid now. He is in the same position without insurance. I randomly picked Colorado.

Nobody is going to get insurance tomorrow if the CR is passed or not. Lets be clear on that.
 
2013-09-30 09:50:54 PM
I_C_Weener: 

Anethesiologists are purely about the money...and free drugs....mostly the money though.

true that.
 
2013-09-30 09:51:49 PM

feckingmorons: birdmanesq: birdmanesq: feckingmorons: birdmanesq: The reason that Obamacare can't get fixed during the normal legislative process is because the extremist, absolutist wing of the Republican Party cannot compromise in good faith. Instead they are forced to attempt to extract unreasonable demands in a hostage-type situation.

The House voted to repeal Obamacare more than 40 times, each time the Senate rejected that. They could have negotiated any one of those times. To suggest that this is a surprise and the Democrat controlled Senate was not given an opportunity to change Obamacare from the overly broad monstrosity that it is today is simply untrue.

You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.

This is a case where you aren't entitled to your own facts. There was no atten

Er.

There was no attempt made to "fix" Obamacare in those House votes. It was entirely a mission of destruction.

Fortunately our constitutional democracy doesn't work that way.

But, if course, the Tea Party hates the Constitution so they're forced to find ways to bypass normal legislative processes to extort concessions. "I didn't get my way? Fine. I'm coming back with a gun and asking again."

You should be f*cking ashamed of yourself that you are condoning this behavior.

Please, you're telling me a bill relating to repealing Obamacare can't be negotiated to fix provisions in Obmamcare. I'm sure you've conveniently forgotten that the Obamacare bill started out as a completely different appropriations bill (as it was an appropriations bill it had to originate in the house) H.R. 3590, the "Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009 by Charlie Rangel ( an admitted tax cheat). It was about servicemembers and taxes.

You can't in good conscience tell me that if they could turn something about military members housing and taxes into Obamacare they could not have used one of the 40+ repeal bills to compromise.

Bypassing normal legislative process, don't give me that ...


Come on.... you say I should be ashamed of myself and you don't reply when I refute your allegations with substance? I just hope you scrolled past it and this will prod you to reply.
 
2013-09-30 09:52:26 PM

pueblonative: pueblonative:
Um, a third of the senate is up for election each year.

*two years.


That would be so nice.
 
2013-09-30 09:52:41 PM

hasty ambush: [24.media.tumblr.com image 500x439]


that cartoon is so farking stupid, i'm not sure where to begin. but how about with the fact that 80 percent of americans get their healthcare through work or the govt. and won't have to do a farking thing. and if you don't want insurance, DON'T GET IT. you'll pay a tax penalty - that's all. i pay one for not having kids. for me, it's worth it.
 
2013-09-30 09:53:14 PM

feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.


Passing a cr is the house's job, not a favour they do for democrats.

If you don't want to do your job as a legislator, resign already.
 
2013-09-30 09:54:21 PM

I_C_Weener: pueblonative: feckingmorons: nmrsnr: why it should be incumbent on the Democrats to initiate negotiations:

They didn't. The House sent them the bill, they make changes and send it back. Simply saying no is not negotiating.

Look at the back and forth on the last CR and you'll see how they negotiated, the Senate didn't just say NO! and go home for the weekend.

Gee, I wonder what could have changed.  It wasn't like the House was led by a bunch of unreasonable loonies who kept moving the goalposts further and further to the right.

I do think it was a lot like the House won't talk to the Senate.  The Senate won't talk to the House.  And Obama is throwing insults at one side instead of reaching out and at least trying to meet with everyone to air out their grievances.  We got the government we deserve.


It is not the policy of the united states to negotiate with terrorists.
 
2013-09-30 09:54:23 PM

I_C_Weener: birdmanesq: This "plague on both their houses" stuff is really bunk in this context. The Republicans in the House are absolutists when it comes to Obamacare repeal.

And the Senate is blind to the need to tweak.  They have the option to fix some of these issues too.  But they don't.  Its not an impasse because of one side only.  That's pure PR spin.  They both are to blame here.

Its not exactly bsabsvr, but the Senate is content to let it stand without change, and to continue with increased spending.  What do they care, they don't need to worry for 6 years.


What, in anything the House has done over the last three years, would give you the idea that they would be amenable to any kind of patch? It would be a futile gesture--as the House has assured the Senate 40+ times.

In fact, it would be worse than futile because Republicans would bludgeon Senate Democrats the moment they got any whiff of an admission of a problem in the law. House Republicans have poisoned the well on this issue and the Democrats are right not to mess with it until the law is more settled--and they are certainly right not to entertain messing around with it in return for a 90-day continuing resolution.
 
2013-09-30 09:55:35 PM

feckingmorons: Yes, there will still be some involuntarily uninsured people, and we should have a solution that addresses that, preferably by finding them a good job with insurance. Obamacare is not creating jobs and not insuring those who are uninsured, unemployed and ineligible for medicaid or medicare either. Look at the Obamacare site for a 30 year old drunkard who isn't eligible for medicare or medicaid now. He is in the same position without insurance. I randomly picked Colorado.


*clicks link for SKG*

FTFL:

Lower Costs on Marketplace Coverage
Based on the information you provided, you may be able to get lower costs for your monthly premiums and out-of-pocket costs when you get insurance through the Marketplace. Whether you qualify will depend on your household size and income. Plans and prices will be available October 1, 2013. You will learn your exact costs and savings when you apply.


Based on the information you provided, you could be eligible for free or low-cost health coverage through Medicaid, which provides coverage to millions of Americans with limited incomes or disabilities. New rules in many states mean you may qualify in 2014 even if you haven't qualified before. Your eligibility will depend on your household income and family size.


You were saying?
 
2013-09-30 09:56:27 PM

Infernalist: Bullshiat.  The House GOP needs to cut their infantile bullshiat and pass a clean CR.


Let me put it this way.   The last time we were here, a last minute deal gave us the Punt and Sequester plan.  When that time expired after neither side blinked again, automatic cuts started to take place...and the Democrats called foul, trying to back out of it and seek all kinds of ways out of that agreement...avoid it, rewrite the law...but not compromise.  NEVER COMPROMISE.  And spend months making fun of the Republicans for that deal...

Then the Sequester goes into effect, cutting some spending and the world doesn't end.

Then...we're here again.

What incentive do the Republicans have that the Democrats will stick to any agreement anyway when scant months before they tried backing out of the last compromese?  In other words, the Republicans will be vilified regardless, and will get nothing out of it.  Why work with Democrats?  At all.
 
2013-09-30 09:56:46 PM

pueblonative: Back to the point:  let's say the Senate did that with one of these 40+ "we hatez the Obamacare, yes we do" Gollum bills.  Do you reasonably expect the Repubs to come anywhere near this type of proposal?


I think a reasonable compromise is possible, yes. It would involve not implementing Obamacare until the exchanges are properly set up. Removing the payments cuts to physicians, removing the non-essential bloat like grants to 4 HBCU medical schools required each year (I don't make this stuff up), stop passing costs along to providers and states as unfunded mandates and put some teeth into the tax collection.

I think the easier thing is to scrap it and start over with a bill not written by partisan lawyers. Stop including pork, and retain the conscience provisions.
 
2013-09-30 09:57:09 PM

feckingmorons: hat is true, but there are no Congressmen calling around to get the best rates from Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule.


I have a friend, he is a lawyer in a private law firm. Tomorrow, he will not be forced to call Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule for the best rates, since he is covered under the insurance policy provided by his employer (I think it's Aetna). Is he "exempt" from the ACA?
 
2013-09-30 09:58:56 PM

feckingmorons: pueblonative: pueblonative:
Um, a third of the senate is up for election each year.

*two years.

That would be so nice.


Been that way since 1789.
 
2013-09-30 09:59:54 PM

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: Bullshiat.  The House GOP needs to cut their infantile bullshiat and pass a clean CR.

Let me put it this way.   The last time we were here, a last minute deal gave us the Punt and Sequester plan.  When that time expired after neither side blinked again, automatic cuts started to take place...and the Democrats called foul, trying to back out of it and seek all kinds of ways out of that agreement...avoid it, rewrite the law...but not compromise.  NEVER COMPROMISE.  And spend months making fun of the Republicans for that deal...

Then the Sequester goes into effect, cutting some spending and the world doesn't end.

Then...we're here again.

What incentive do the Republicans have that the Democrats will stick to any agreement anyway when scant months before they tried backing out of the last compromese?  In other words, the Republicans will be vilified regardless, and will get nothing out of it.  Why work with Democrats?  At all.


The GOP has given the Democratic party 3 years worth of reasons not to cooperate or compromise.  The entirety of Obamacare is a compromise to the GOP and they still voted, lockstep, against it.

And now?  The GOP is the minority party, the weaker party, and they're trying to set the legislative agenda by doing nothing but repeals of Obamacare for the last 3 years.

At any point in that three years, they could have tried to negotiate with the Democrats and the WH, but they didn't.  Well, sorry, but you're out of time and you have no lifelines left.

Issuing a list of demands or forcing a government shut down is not a negotiating starting point.  It's an ultimatum and it smacks of economic terrorism.

You want to compromise on Obamacare?  Fine.  Do it tomorrow.  Tonight, they do their farking jobs and pass a CR to keep the country running.
 
2013-09-30 10:00:46 PM

FlashHarry: hasty ambush: [24.media.tumblr.com image 500x439]

that cartoon is so farking stupid, i'm not sure where to begin. but how about with the fact that 80 percent of americans get their healthcare through work or the govt. and won't have to do a farking thing. and if you don't want insurance, DON'T GET IT. you'll pay a tax penalty - that's all. i pay one for not having kids. for me, it's worth it.


You don't see taxing people for not getting insurance as bad? 2.5% of your entire family's income if you don't get a plan that meets their definition of MEC. I used to have a commercial 80/20 plan with a 10K deductible for about $455/yr about 10 years ago. That would no longer qualify, I would be well insured but I would have to pay thousands in a tax penalty because I didn't want a more expensive plan that I didn't need.
 
2013-09-30 10:01:25 PM

nmrsnr: feckingmorons: hat is true, but there are no Congressmen calling around to get the best rates from Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule.

I have a friend, he is a lawyer in a private law firm. Tomorrow, he will not be forced to call Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule for the best rates, since he is covered under the insurance policy provided by his employer (I think it's Aetna). Is he "exempt" from the ACA?


Yes, in the same sense that a member of congress is.
 
2013-09-30 10:02:47 PM

feckingmorons: pueblonative: Back to the point:  let's say the Senate did that with one of these 40+ "we hatez the Obamacare, yes we do" Gollum bills.  Do you reasonably expect the Repubs to come anywhere near this type of proposal?

I think a reasonable compromise is possible, yes. It would involve not implementing Obamacare until the exchanges are properly set up. Removing the payments cuts to physicians, removing the non-essential bloat like grants to 4 HBCU medical schools required each year (I don't make this stuff up), stop passing costs along to providers and states as unfunded mandates and put some teeth into the tax collection.

I think the easier thing is to scrap it and start over with a bill not written by partisan lawyers. Stop including pork, and retain the conscience provisions.


Actually, if we wanted to control costs and deal with dsoctors not having to charge outrageous prices for their care, then perhaps we should do like they do in Europe, and subsidize the education of someone that goes into the medical field.  Then, while undergoing their residencies, also pay them a stipend (with the amount being paid by the stipend depending on what specialty they go into, with GP's drawing a full paycheck, and specialists getting a smaller one (mainly due to the fact that there is a severe shortage of GP's in the US right now.)).

I know this might surprise you, but doctors should be getting into that field because they actually want to help the people they are dealing with, not have it be a way to make a lot of money.  Taking the huge medical school bills out of the equation would be a big help in dealing with that.
 
2013-09-30 10:03:00 PM

feckingmorons: pueblonative: Back to the point:  let's say the Senate did that with one of these 40+ "we hatez the Obamacare, yes we do" Gollum bills.  Do you reasonably expect the Repubs to come anywhere near this type of proposal?

I think a reasonable compromise is possible, yes. It would involve not implementing Obamacare until the exchanges are properly set up. Removing the payments cuts to physicians, removing the non-essential bloat like grants to 4 HBCU medical schools required each year (I don't make this stuff up), stop passing costs along to providers and states as unfunded mandates and put some teeth into the tax collection.

I think the easier thing is to scrap it and start over with a bill not written by partisan lawyers. Stop including pork, and retain the conscience provisions.


Obamacare doesn't go into effect until the exchanges are in place. They go live tomorrow. The ACA and mandate start in three months. What's your beef?
 
2013-09-30 10:03:11 PM

feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.


You are right.  These are the people who shouldn't have insurance, because we need them out of the gene pool as quickly as possible.
 
2013-09-30 10:04:07 PM

feckingmorons: You don't see taxing people for not getting insurance as bad?


not at all. they drive up costs for the rest of us.

everyone consumes health care. everyone. and just like everyone who drives a car needs insurance, everyone who consumes - or will consume - healthcare should have it too.
 
2013-09-30 10:04:43 PM

feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money


then he/she drinks a whole 30 pack of keystone light and who pays for their ER visit? Like I said, you are advocating for a system where we still pay for all these people regardless.

He is in the same position without insurance.

and again, that position is one where his medical bills are  being paid for by everyone else.

I'd rather see a single payer system with private supplemental where like you did, at a cost per year what I spend a little over a month on insurance. I personally don't see a problem with that.
 
2013-09-30 10:05:14 PM

feckingmorons: TuteTibiImperes: Also, give RNs, PAs, and NPs more power to do more without direct doctor supervision, and expand the things they're allowed to do in general.  Most routine ailments don't need a full fledged doctor to be diagnosed and treated successfully.

I'd rather see the worst physician than the best RN, and I am one of the best RNs.

My friend Rick who was an ER doc gave up his private practice to go to the ER, seven years later he quit that to fish for a living. He is much happier.

My friend Steve is an orthopedic surgeon, he pays $4 an hour, every hour of every day for all the insurance (all lines) his practice requires. He wishes he had done something else, but medical school really only prepares you for one thing. He is getting an executive MBA and going into consulting in a few years when he sells his practice to "Some idealistic SOB."

People simply won't go into medicine. Obamacare cuts reimbursements (I have no idea why they use that word when they mean payments, they are not reimbursing anyone they are paying doctors for their work).

Would you want to get paid $57.30 for an office visit from a commercial plan, $75 from a guy who pays cash, or $12,91 from medicare? The government funded rates are going down. Would you see patients for 1/6 of your value, would you see them at a net loss? Name a physician - not employed or affiliated with the government who still really sees patients in his own practice- who is in favor of Obamacare and I'll eat my hat.


If single payer is so bad for doctors, why do people go into medicine in all of the countries that do have it?  Why are there doctors in Canada or the UK?

I'm not suggesting that the payment rate be set all the way down to $12.91, but there could certainly be some concessions made.

From what I understand malpractice insurance is a major cost for a lot of doctors, so why not institute major tort reform along with it?  Greatly limit what people can sue for, the amounts they can win, and make the standard of proof higher.  If a doctor's malpractice insurance goes down $50K per year, he shouldn't care about a $50K per year reduction in income, it nets out the same.

Also, per your comments on RNs, from my experience they do just about everything anyway.  The last few times I've had to visit the doctor's office the RN comes in, takes all of my vitals, hears my description of the problem, and writes it all up.  Later the doctor comes in for a short period, confirms what the RN told him, and writes a prescription.  When it comes to getting x-rays, being given a nebulizer treatment,  etc, that's all done by the nurse.

Granted, for serious stuff I'd like to see a doctor involves, but for the majority of run of the mill medical work, what's wrong with nurses and NPs?
 
2013-09-30 10:05:25 PM

feckingmorons: FlashHarry: hasty ambush: [24.media.tumblr.com image 500x439]

that cartoon is so farking stupid, i'm not sure where to begin. but how about with the fact that 80 percent of americans get their healthcare through work or the govt. and won't have to do a farking thing. and if you don't want insurance, DON'T GET IT. you'll pay a tax penalty - that's all. i pay one for not having kids. for me, it's worth it.

You don't see taxing people for not getting insurance as bad? 2.5% of your entire family's income if you don't get a plan that meets their definition of MEC. I used to have a commercial 80/20 plan with a 10K deductible for about $455/yr about 10 years ago. That would no longer qualify, I would be well insured but I would have to pay thousands in a tax penalty because I didn't want a more expensive plan that I didn't need.


Actually, having a NHS or something like the Canadian Medicare would be best, since there are no out of pocket expenses.  Or even a public/private system like Germany has.  Healthcare coverage in the US is an abomination, and whole the ACA isn't the best thing we could have gotten, it's most definitely a step in the right direction.  No matter how much you personally feel the need to rail on it.
 
2013-09-30 10:06:16 PM

feckingmorons: I think a reasonable compromise is possible, yes. It would involve not implementing Obamacare until the exchanges are properly set up. Removing the payments cuts to physicians, removing the non-essential bloat like grants to 4 HBCU medical schools required each year (I don't make this stuff up), stop passing costs along to providers and states as unfunded mandates and put some teeth into the tax collection.

I think the easier thing is to scrap it and start over with a bill not written by partisan lawyers. Stop including pork, and retain the conscience provisions.


Yeah, why would lawyers have anything to do with the law?  As for the conscience provision, no way.  Why should an employer be able to cherry pick the parts of the law that their insurance complies with?  They entered the public marketplace; they can comply with the rules about coverage.  If they don't, just let them pay the penalty and the government will help their female employees purchase a health insurance plan that's not (badly) based off a religious screed invented by goat farmers tripping balls on the side of Mount Siani.
 
2013-09-30 10:06:17 PM

feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money


I heard Rush Limbaugh say something like that in the early 90s when Clinton was trying to push Universal healthcare. It was a stupid point then and it's a stupid point now. In your defense, I didn't read your post in Rush's voice.
 
2013-09-30 10:06:55 PM

udhq: feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.

Passing a cr is the house's job, not a favour they do for democrats.

If you don't want to do your job as a legislator, resign already.


You realize if they resigned they would all be replaced with people who want Obamacare even less. It is polling like crap now :
"The CNN poll found that the public is growing more skeptical of Obamacare - 57 percent say they oppose the law, up 3 percentage points from a poll in May" From Christian Science Monitor

Please see the CSM article,as it shows that 60% of Americans also oppose a shutdown, as do I. The better answer is to delay implementation of the individual mandate and see if it can be imporved, and keep the lights on at the government.
 
2013-09-30 10:08:03 PM

AurizenDarkstar: I know this might surprise you, but doctors should be getting into that field because they actually want to help the people they are dealing with, not have it be a way to make a lot of money.  Taking the huge medical school bills out of the equation would be a big help in dealing with that.


How do you think the medical schools would feel about that?
 
2013-09-30 10:09:34 PM
feckingmorons:

There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.

Anyone under 30 can buy a high deductible 'catastrophic loss' plan and be good in terms of the ACA.

Ideally I'd like to see that moved up to 40, but things like that can be negotiated once things are rolling.
 
2013-09-30 10:10:07 PM

feckingmorons: udhq: feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.

Passing a cr is the house's job, not a favour they do for democrats.

If you don't want to do your job as a legislator, resign already.

You realize if they resigned they would all be replaced with people who want Obamacare even less. It is polling like crap now :
"The CNN poll found that the public is growing more skeptical of Obamacare - 57 percent say they oppose the law, up 3 percentage points from a poll in May" From Christian Science Monitor

Please see the CSM article,as it shows that 60% of Americans also oppose a shutdown, as do I. The better answer is to delay implementation of the individual mandate and see if it can be imporved, and keep the lights on at the government.


And you know damn well that delaying the individual mandate would cause the ACA to have severe funding problems.  It would end up going into an actuarial death spiral if enough healthy people decided they weren't going to sign up.  It's just another roundabout way to dismantle the law, abeit one that ends up failing due to the same reasons why when states tried to set up state healthcare plans that dealt with what the ACA does (without a mandate).
 
2013-09-30 10:10:39 PM

TuteTibiImperes: From what I understand malpractice insurance is a major cost for a lot of doctors, so why not institute major tort reform along with it? Greatly limit what people can sue for, the amounts they can win, and make the standard of proof higher. If a doctor's malpractice insurance goes down $50K per year, he shouldn't care about a $50K per year reduction in income, it nets out the same.


The idea that medical malpractice insurance has any bearing on health care costs has been bunked, debunked, rebunked, and taken out back to the woodshed and done so hard even the chickens that Republicans fark shudder.
 
2013-09-30 10:11:19 PM

Headso: feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money

then he/she drinks a whole 30 pack of keystone light and who pays for their ER visit? Like I said, you are advocating for a system where we still pay for all these people regardless.

He is in the same position without insurance.

and again, that position is one where his medical bills are  being paid for by everyone else.

I'd rather see a single payer system with private supplemental where like you did, at a cost per year what I spend a little over a month on insurance. I personally don't see a problem with that.


We'd continue having battles over stuff like "is it enough healthcare" like we do routinely with minimum wage, and other welfare.  But I'd prefer your option over Obamacare.  My option was the easiest to implement, but the time for that is long past.  I'd still love a public option to compete with the insurance companies in the exchanges.  Expand Medicare.
 
2013-09-30 10:11:23 PM

feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.


And those people would be rightly called MOOCHERS.  Ready to be bailed out by you and me if something bad happens.
 
2013-09-30 10:11:27 PM

TuteTibiImperes: If single payer is so bad for doctors, why do people go into medicine in all of the countries that do have it?  Why are there doctors in Canada or the UK?I'm not suggesting that the payment rate be set all the way down to $12.91, but there could certainly be some concessions made.


The docs there are paid a salary and don't have to fund the office, equiptment, staff, etc. It is an OK 9-5 job most days.

The $12.91 is the actual reimbursement for a Medicare limited scope office visit for an existing patient in my area. (99211 billing code). They can do three or four of those an hour and they still have to pay the light bill and the staff and insurance and medical supplies and and and.
 
2013-09-30 10:11:45 PM

feckingmorons: Yes, in the same sense that a member of congress is.


So according to you, roughly 70% (according to the US census bureau warning: pdf) of Americans over 15 are exempt from the ACA. I think you and I have a very different definition of "exempt" because otherwise why would anyone be angry that congresspeople follow the same rules as every other employed person, seeing as congresspeople are, you know, employed?
 
2013-09-30 10:12:14 PM

feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: I know this might surprise you, but doctors should be getting into that field because they actually want to help the people they are dealing with, not have it be a way to make a lot of money.  Taking the huge medical school bills out of the equation would be a big help in dealing with that.

How do you think the medical schools would feel about that?


As far as them still getting paid, I wouldn't think a lot of medical schools would really give a damn.  It just takes the costs off of the person learning to become a doctor so that they can worry less about funding and more about learning their job.

Now, if you mean that medical schools wouldn't be able to charge outrageous prices for medical education, then I could really give a damn if they don't like it.
 
2013-09-30 10:12:30 PM

TuteTibiImperes: feckingmorons:

There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.

Anyone under 30 can buy a high deductible 'catastrophic loss' plan and be good in terms of the ACA.

Ideally I'd like to see that moved up to 40, but things like that can be negotiated once things are rolling.


Could you show me that somewhere? If that is true that is good news, but I've never seen it.

Why can't we fix it before we 'get it rolling' ?
 
2013-09-30 10:12:30 PM

Mugato: feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money

I heard Rush Limbaugh say something like that in the early 90s when Clinton was trying to push Universal healthcare. It was a stupid point then and it's a stupid point now. In your defense, I didn't read your post in Rush's voice.


they don't want to pay for insurance but when they get hurt or sick they want full medical coverage, that's probably what everyone wants 25 or not.
 
2013-09-30 10:13:45 PM

TuteTibiImperes: being given a nebulizer treatment,


No, I'll not have my memory erased. They're only allowed to do that if I see an alien.
 
2013-09-30 10:13:46 PM

nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Yes, in the same sense that a member of congress is.

So according to you, roughly 70% (according to the US census bureau warning: pdf) of Americans over 15 are exempt from the ACA. I think you and I have a very different definition of "exempt" because otherwise why would anyone be angry that congresspeople follow the same rules as every other employed person, seeing as congresspeople are, you know, employed?


Exempt from being forced to purchase insurance through an exchange. I think people would like to see members of congress restricted to the plans on the exchange.
 
2013-09-30 10:14:59 PM
Headso:
they don't want to pay for insurance but when they get hurt or sick they want full medical coverage, that's probably what everyone wants 25 or not.

Which to me sounds a lot like someone who decides to not have auto insurance, but once they're in a wreck, demands that they be allowed to purchase a policy at decent prices.  I think the issue is that people have NO clue how insurance is supposed to actually work.
 
2013-09-30 10:15:11 PM

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: feckingmorons: hat is true, but there are no Congressmen calling around to get the best rates from Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule.

I have a friend, he is a lawyer in a private law firm. Tomorrow, he will not be forced to call Blue Cross, United , and Golden Rule for the best rates, since he is covered under the insurance policy provided by his employer (I think it's Aetna). Is he "exempt" from the ACA?

Yes, in the same sense that a member of congress is.


But when the firm re-news its insurance plan, or chooses not to, then he will need to make a decision.  That is usually December or January.  Keep his offered employer plan (with or without a subsidy from the firm), go with an exchange plan (with or without a government subsidy) or forgo insurance.  Just like everyone.
 
2013-09-30 10:17:01 PM

AurizenDarkstar: feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: I know this might surprise you, but doctors should be getting into that field because they actually want to help the people they are dealing with, not have it be a way to make a lot of money.  Taking the huge medical school bills out of the equation would be a big help in dealing with that.

How do you think the medical schools would feel about that?

As far as them still getting paid, I wouldn't think a lot of medical schools would really give a damn.  It just takes the costs off of the person learning to become a doctor so that they can worry less about funding and more about learning their job.

Now, if you mean that medical schools wouldn't be able to charge outrageous prices for medical education, then I could really give a damn if they don't like it.


12349876: feckingmorons: There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.

And those people would be rightly called MOOCHERS.  Ready to be bailed out by you and me if something bad happens.


You can't categorize people like that. Perhaps he has a $10K CD that he could use if he had to but wants to save for a house after he graduates.
Insurance is a matter of acceptance and assignment of risk. The guy with the 10K deductible is retaining that risk, but paying someone else (the insurance company) to take the next $990000 of risk for him. Since most medical bills, even when added together, for the average 25 year old student won't reach 10K that is a pretty good risk for the insurance company to assume.
 
2013-09-30 10:17:16 PM

feckingmorons: Why can't we fix it before we 'get it rolling' ?


Because the republicans don't want to get the ball rolling ever. Hundreds of posts and you're still not grasping that? Does it need to be worked out for you in interpretive dance or something?
 
2013-09-30 10:17:37 PM

feckingmorons: TuteTibiImperes: feckingmorons:

There are many people who simply don't want insurance, a 25 year old college student may forgo insurance for beer money, or perhaps he wants a $10K deductible policy. He would be penailized for that.

Anyone under 30 can buy a high deductible 'catastrophic loss' plan and be good in terms of the ACA.

Ideally I'd like to see that moved up to 40, but things like that can be negotiated once things are rolling.

Could you show me that somewhere? If that is true that is good news, but I've never seen it.

Why can't we fix it before we 'get it rolling' ?


It was actually in the link from one of your previous posts, here's the direct page.
 
2013-09-30 10:18:49 PM

feckingmorons: Exempt from being forced to purchase insurance through an exchange. I think people would like to see members of congress restricted to the plans on the exchange.


Aside from petty spite, why? They are gainfully employed by an employer who provides insurance. Why should they have to break their own system and remove a benefit of employment for themselves that no one else has to follow?

Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.
 
2013-09-30 10:20:17 PM

feckingmorons: udhq: feckingmorons: peasandcarrots: That's what you, and thirty Congressmen, don't get. "I get everything and you get nothing,

You don't see the Continuing Resolution as something? You think that is nothing? That I think is where you fail to see there is a quid pro quo.

Passing a cr is the house's job, not a favour they do for democrats.

If you don't want to do your job as a legislator, resign already.

You realize if they resigned they would all be replaced with people who want Obamacare even less. It is polling like crap now :
"The CNN poll found that the public is growing more skeptical of Obamacare - 57 percent say they oppose the law, up 3 percentage points from a poll in May" From Christian Science Monitor

Please see the CSM article,as it shows that 60% of Americans also oppose a shutdown, as do I. The better answer is to delay implementation of the individual mandate and see if it can be imporved, and keep the lights on at the government.


And my answer is who cares about the polling on the ACA?

Is settled law, and the gop doesn't have the votes to overturn it through legitimate legislative means.

The fact that a 3 year campaign of obfuscation and lies by the gop has moved to polling needle is neither here nor there. 2012 was a referendum on the ACA, and the American people voted overwhelmingly to keep it in place.
 
2013-09-30 10:20:35 PM

AurizenDarkstar: And you know damn well that delaying the individual mandate would cause the ACA to have severe funding problems.  It would end up going into an actuarial death spiral if enough healthy people decided they weren't going to sign up.  It's just another roundabout way to dismantle the law, abeit one that ends up failing due to the same reasons why when states tried to set up state healthcare plans that dealt with what the ACA does (without a mandate).


Do you think it is actuarially sound now? I don't know of an actuary who thinks it is. The disincentive as they are wont to call the 1% or $95 tax won't force healthy people into the plans.
 
2013-09-30 10:21:31 PM

Mugato: feckingmorons: Why can't we fix it before we 'get it rolling' ?

Because the republicans don't want to get the ball rolling ever. Hundreds of posts and you're still not grasping that? Does it need to be worked out for you in interpretive dance or something?


They are asking for a 1 year delay for the individual mandate. The same delay the president unilaterally gave businesses.

They are not asking for a repeal now. They will again, but not tonight.
 
2013-09-30 10:22:11 PM
feckingmorons:

You can't categorize people like that. Perhaps he has a $10K CD that he could use if he had to but wants to save for a house after he graduates.
Insurance is a matter of acceptance and assignment of risk. The guy with the 10K deductible is retaining that risk, but paying someone else (the insurance company) to take the next $990000 of risk for him. Since most medical bills, even when added together, for the average 25 year old student won't reach 10K that is a pretty good risk for the insurance company to assume.



You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.

I'd really like to know from another health care worker why you really feel that leaving our national healthcare situation exactly the way it is right now, instead of dealing with the changes brought about by the ACA, and would rather see those changes streamlined and made better instead of just trashing the whole thing.
 
2013-09-30 10:22:41 PM

nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.


Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?
 
2013-09-30 10:22:47 PM

feckingmorons: They are asking for a 1 year delay for the individual mandate. The same delay the president unilaterally gave businesses.

They are not asking for a repeal now. They will again, but not tonight.


No, a year from now. Or another "extension". It's pretty blatant.
 
2013-09-30 10:24:19 PM

Mugato: TuteTibiImperes: being given a nebulizer treatment,

No, I'll not have my memory erased. They're only allowed to do that if I see an alien.


Sadly, I that sounds like a response that would come out of Congress these days.
 
2013-09-30 10:25:08 PM

feckingmorons: I think people would like to see members of congress restricted to the plans on the exchange.


Newsflash: They ARE being required to purchase insurance on the exchange.
 
2013-09-30 10:26:09 PM

feckingmorons: The $12.91 is the actual reimbursement for a Medicare limited scope office visit for an existing patient in my area. (99211 billing code). They can do three or four of those an hour and they still have to pay the light bill and the staff and insurance and medical supplies and and and.


medicare is made up of people who would make the worst possible risk poll a private company could ever imagine, it takes a huge burden of private insurers. You act like it's comparable at all to private insurance. It's like those people who talk about how great private schools are but never mention that all bad kids are just thrown out and go to public school.
 
2013-09-30 10:26:53 PM

I_C_Weener: Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?


You probably can, but I don't think your employer would be required to pitch in for it, so it would probably be more expensive, plus the government might not subsidize it, plus insurance shopping is annoying.
 
2013-09-30 10:29:40 PM

I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?


I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.
 
2013-09-30 10:30:25 PM

nmrsnr: I_C_Weener: Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

You probably can, but I don't think your employer would be required to pitch in for it, so it would probably be more expensive, plus the government might not subsidize it, plus insurance shopping is annoying.


Yeah, that's my understanding.  The employer plan is subsidized by the employer...for now.  I fully expect many to stop doing that.  They already are as a group subsidizing less and less of it.  And at some point it will make more sense to get the exchange plans, maybe even without a government subsidy

I don't see any scenario where the employer pays for the exchange plan.
 
2013-09-30 10:30:58 PM

nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Exempt from being forced to purchase insurance through an exchange. I think people would like to see members of congress restricted to the plans on the exchange.

Aside from petty spite, why? They are gainfully employed by an employer who provides insurance. Why should they have to break their own system and remove a benefit of employment for themselves that no one else has to follow?

Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.


What about the 3000+ part time employees of Home Depot, that will be shunted from employer sponsored health care to the government exchanges? What happens to all the other people who have their hours slashed so the employer no longer has to offer them insurance? Trader Joes, Sea World, Forever 21 are all slashing hours.


If your employer cuts your hours to less than 30 they no longer have to offer you insurance. If they do offer you insurance it will be much more expensive than last year.

You can get insurance from the exchanges but those too will be much higher than your company insurance was.

You're screwed coming and going, you have fewer hours and you have to pay 100% of your insurance (less any subsidy- as an example in the linked article $300 our of $1449 for someone making $15K).

Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.
 
2013-09-30 10:31:00 PM

feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: And you know damn well that delaying the individual mandate would cause the ACA to have severe funding problems.  It would end up going into an actuarial death spiral if enough healthy people decided they weren't going to sign up.  It's just another roundabout way to dismantle the law, abeit one that ends up failing due to the same reasons why when states tried to set up state healthcare plans that dealt with what the ACA does (without a mandate).

Do you think it is actuarially sound now? I don't know of an actuary who thinks it is. The disincentive as they are wont to call the 1% or $95 tax won't force healthy people into the plans.


Then why does it work in Massachusetts?  I mean, you can't all of a sudden say "Yeah, it will only work on a state by state basis, it could NEVER work on a national basis."

The only real reason that they want a delay of the mandate is due to the fact that it will either give them time to find another way to dismantle the law, or they realize it will force the ACA into the actuarial death spiral, which will kill it outright unless the government spends billions to prop it up.  They're hoping to delay it long enough to gain the majority in the Senate again, and if they don't, it just gives them long enough to demand yet another delay when the one they're asking for runs out.
 
2013-09-30 10:31:38 PM

Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.


I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.
 
2013-09-30 10:33:18 PM

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.


It's for everyone, as I understand it.  Companies are simply required to provide that option to their employees, should they wish to make use of it.
 
2013-09-30 10:34:49 PM

AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.


Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:11 PM

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


I anticipate a lot of this as unintended consequences.  Though, I doubt we will know for sure the actual effect until it goes into effect fully.  No one really seems to have a full handle on what will happen.  it might work out to benefit all, but i suspect lots of employers and insurance companies changing tactics to lower costs.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:11 PM

I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.


Here's the details (from Kaiser Family Foundation):
"In general, employees who are offered insurance through work are not eligible for subsidized exchange coverage, so long as their insurance meets specified requirements. You would only be eligible for subsidized exchange coverage if your income is between 1 and 4 times the federal poverty level and you would have to pay more than 9.5% of your household income for your own coverage through the insurance offered by your employer."

Granted, that's subsidized rates. Not sure if you would be eligible for un-subsidized exchange rates.
 
2013-09-30 10:35:12 PM

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


www.visi.com

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.
 
2013-09-30 10:37:30 PM

feckingmorons: Insurance is a matter of acceptance and assignment of risk. The guy with the 10K deductible is retaining that risk, but paying someone else (the insurance company) to take the next $990000 of risk for him. Since most medical bills, even when added together, for the average 25 year old student won't reach 10K that is a pretty good risk for the insurance company to assume.


But you're still paying for the few who do get that cancer diagnosis or flown through a tornado.  And you as a nurse should know the value of preventative medicine.  When these people don't see the doctor, they could very well harboring problems that could be nipped in the bud on the cheap or pushed down the road to raise your costs.
 
2013-09-30 10:37:53 PM

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?
 
2013-09-30 10:38:01 PM

I_C_Weener: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

I anticipate a lot of this as unintended consequences.  Though, I doubt we will know for sure the actual effect until it goes into effect fully.  No one really seems to have a full handle on what will happen.  it might work out to benefit all, but i suspect lots of employers and insurance companies changing tactics to lower costs.


This is exactly why it should be delayed. We don't need to implement it to see who gets screwed, we need to find out who will get screwed and then fix those problems. Obamacare is filled with unintended consequences, and none of them fark over the rich.
 
2013-09-30 10:39:01 PM

feckingmorons: What about the 3000+ part time employees of Home Depot, that will be shunted from employer sponsored health care to the government exchanges? What happens to all the other people who have their hours slashed so the employer no longer has to offer them insurance? Trader Joes, Sea World, Forever 21 are all slashing hours.


Those employees are better off working for a company that aren't full of douchebags at HQ.
 
2013-09-30 10:40:04 PM

nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.


Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?
 
2013-09-30 10:41:00 PM

12349876: feckingmorons: What about the 3000+ part time employees of Home Depot, that will be shunted from employer sponsored health care to the government exchanges? What happens to all the other people who have their hours slashed so the employer no longer has to offer them insurance? Trader Joes, Sea World, Forever 21 are all slashing hours.

Those employees are better off working for a company that aren't full of douchebags at HQ.


Who is hiring these days? Sure, were all better off working for a firm that has great insurance, but service industries generally don't offer great insurance.
 
2013-09-30 10:41:42 PM

Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?


Where exactly does the money for those subsidies come from?
 
2013-09-30 10:42:05 PM

kidgenius: I_C_Weener: Infernalist: I_C_Weener: nmrsnr: Health insurance is still an employee benefit, the exchanges are for the unemployed, or small businesses for whom providing insurance would be a burden.

Am I wrong that I can choose the exchange even if I'm employed and have employer insurance?

I believe you're right.  If you can get a better deal through the exchanges, you can drop your employer supplied health care and pick up a private plan.

I hope so.  Someone's comment made me wonder though if the exchanges were only open to those without an employer option...good or bad.

Here's the details (from Kaiser Family Foundation):
"In general, employees who are offered insurance through work are not eligible for subsidized exchange coverage, so long as their insurance meets specified requirements. You would only be eligible for subsidized exchange coverage if your income is between 1 and 4 times the federal poverty level and you would have to pay more than 9.5% of your household income for your own coverage through the insurance offered by your employer."

Granted, that's subsidized rates. Not sure if you would be eligible for un-subsidized exchange rates.


Well, that screws me then.  Right now we pay roughly 15% of gross income for insurance (subsidized by employer).  But the employer plan is good, so it would likely meet the Obamacare minimums.  We can't shop around basically.  Though I'd also be limited to a small amount, if any exchange subsidy anyway.
 
2013-09-30 10:42:28 PM

feckingmorons: nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.

Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?



I do.  The only states where the working poor will get the shaft are those states where the governors decided to turn down the Medicaid expansion, or in the case of a state like Florida or Georgia, where the state legislature has been doing their damnedest to screw with the law so less people have access to the exchanges.

Outside of that, I think quite a few people will be signing up for coverage.  Many who probably had NO access to any health insurance at any cost.
 
2013-09-30 10:43:36 PM
hasty ambush:

img.fark.net

lwtc247.files.wordpress.com

Jesus Christ.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:06 PM

feckingmorons: Come on.... you say I should be ashamed of myself and you don't reply when I refute your allegations with substance? I just hope you scrolled past it and this will prod you to reply.


That is sort of disappointing. I thought you would be one of the few to stand up for his assertions.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:29 PM

feckingmorons: Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?

Where exactly does the money for those subsidies come from?


progressive taxation like other federally funded social services.
 
2013-09-30 10:44:39 PM

feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


And so will the benefits.  This law isn't designed for the white collar folks who already have cadillac health plans nor the old and the destitute that already have Medicaid and Medicare.
 
2013-09-30 10:45:13 PM

feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.

Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.


HDHPs aren't necessarily bad, I had one through my previous employer, and while it was affordable and made me feel better knowing I wouldn't be bankrupted due to any accident or serious illness, there are also some drawbacks.

Mainly, knowing that I would be on the hook for the full cost of an office visit plus the full cost of any prescriptions made me very choosy about going to see the doctor.  Rash on my leg?  Buy some cortizone cream and hope it goes away on its own.  Pains the the chest/shoulder region?  Pop a bunch of Aleve and hope it's just muscle strain and goes away on its own.  Severe congestion and raspy breathing making it nearly impossible to sleep?  Try every OTC I could find for a week before I finally broke down and went in (only to be hit with $130 for the visit, $60 for an albuterol treatment, and $220 for a steroid inhaler the doctor insisted on instead of the $12 prednisone pack the guy before him had prescribed for the same issue the year before, which worked better than the expensive fancy stuff anyway).

So, lower average cost, but it does lead to unexpected bills when you do get sick, and at least for me it made me try to avoid going to the doctor whenever I could.  If I had flat $60 copays and prescription coverage, I would have been much more likely to go.  If we had universal single payer and I could walk in with no charge, there would be no hesitation at all.

Since a lot of things are cheaper and easier to treat if they're caught early, we should have a system that encourages people to go to the doctor, not one that encourages them to avoid it until they can't anymore.
 
2013-09-30 10:45:26 PM

AurizenDarkstar: feckingmorons: nmrsnr: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

[www.visi.com image 500x75]

So they are not exempt, and they are not special. Any other argument is not what we were talking about. I asked if hasty ambush honestly believed that they were exempt, and you came to his defense.

Actually I responsed to you that they were 'exempt' in the sense that people with insurance through their employer are not required to use the exchanges.
/nor people on Medicare, VA health, people in Guam, lots of people don't have to use them.

Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


I do.  The only states where the working poor will get the shaft are those states where the governors decided to turn down the Medicaid expansion, or in the case of a state like Florida or Georgia, where the state legislature has been doing their damnedest to screw with the law so less people have access to the exchanges.

Outside of that, I think quite a few people will be signing up for coverage.  Many who probably had NO access to any health insurance at any cost.


I disagree, but only time will tell. I would prefer nobody get screwed, but I'm afraid Obamacare won't help as many people as conventional wisdom seems to think it will and it will exacerbate the situations of the working poor.
 
2013-09-30 10:47:31 PM

TuteTibiImperes: feckingmorons: AurizenDarkstar: You're an RN, and you're suggesting that people should gamble with their lives by either not carrying insurance, or only carrying a catastrophic plan (just in case they get hit by a car or somehow get cancer).  I would suggest you find another line of work.

Some people can afford a high deductible catastrophic plan. Think of it as auto insurance, you don't get insurance for oil changes, and when somebody backs into you and takes off you don't report that $100 light to your insurance.

I have a different plan now (HDHP with HSA) so I don't get my own commercial plan but I still have a high dudectible, but for a young person the chances of getting cancer (hit by a car was covered under my state's mandatory PIP up to 10K) are pretty slim so in a risk-reward calculation it paid off well for me.

All insurance is a gamble, we want a low premium and in return we take less coverage. Look at the Bronze, Silver and Gold plans in Obamacare you'll see the same risk-reward method.

HDHPs aren't necessarily bad, I had one through my previous employer, and while it was affordable and made me feel better knowing I wouldn't be bankrupted due to any accident or serious illness, there are also some drawbacks.

Mainly, knowing that I would be on the hook for the full cost of an office visit plus the full cost of any prescriptions made me very choosy about going to see the doctor.  Rash on my leg?  Buy some cortizone cream and hope it goes away on its own.  Pains the the chest/shoulder region?  Pop a bunch of Aleve and hope it's just muscle strain and goes away on its own.  Severe congestion and raspy breathing making it nearly impossible to sleep?  Try every OTC I could find for a week before I finally broke down and went in (only to be hit with $130 for the visit, $60 for an albuterol treatment, and $220 for a steroid inhaler the doctor insisted on instead of the $12 prednisone pack the guy before him had prescribed for the same issue the year before, ...


I bet the HDHP wasn't your only choice. I know in many states (and perhaps all) you must be offered an HMO or PPO in addition to any HDHP. Of course they cost a bit more, but then you only pay small co-payments at time of service.
 
2013-09-30 10:47:32 PM

Headso: feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.

if that's actually true then subsidies should be raised so they can afford it but that might be a problem considering republicans/conservatives spent the whole last election talking about poor people getting "some skin in the game" and pay more. Is that suddenly not the case?


You would probably have to show proof that you don't have a refrigerator before you can qualify.
 
2013-09-30 10:48:14 PM

12349876: feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?

And so will the benefits.  This law isn't designed for the white collar folks who already have cadillac health plans nor the old and the destitute that already have Medicaid and Medicare.


But I do think there is a risk that many of the "middle class" with decent plans will lose those plans either because the employer drops them, or lowers their subsidssy of those plans...or the insurance company drops the benefits (at the same premium) to the bare minimum plan making anything else more attractive.  And the end result will be a worse plan from the exchange at the same or higher cost.

That is my guess on what will happen given the news stories of moving people to part time, and my experiences watching the smaller employers cut costs by dropping insurance altogether.
 
2013-09-30 10:48:37 PM
I'm off to bed. Email your congressman and tell them they are morons, Republican, Democrats, even that one independent guy. Remind them who they work for, us not themselves.
 
2013-09-30 10:49:00 PM
This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?
 
2013-09-30 10:49:46 PM

feckingmorons: Do you disagree that the problems with Obamacare will fall more on the working poor than anyone else?


Yes, because they will have subsidized insurance rates on the exchanges and should be getting more comprehensive coverage based on ACA requirements, and the 85% rule ensures the insurance companies are spending their money on clients health care costs. But all of that is beside the point. The point is that budget debates are NOT the appropriate time to bring up such changes, and these sorts of fine details are NOT what the Republicans are interested in debating. They are advocating wholesale repeal, and nothing else. If they were serious about making changes, they had 3 years to suggest tweaking the law in any number of ways, but they never did, they maintained from the beginning that "Obamacare" required nothing less than full "repeal and replace."

Now, as a last ditch effort, they art holding the functioning of the federal government as a bargaining chip, when it is supposed to be the desire of ALL parties to keep the government running in good order.
 
2013-09-30 10:50:42 PM

DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?


My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.
 
2013-09-30 10:52:11 PM

nmrsnr: when it is supposed to be the desire of ALL parties to keep the government running in good order.


Yeah, well they don't care about us, any of them. All they care about is themselves. Piss on them, vote all of them out and get a new crop in 2014.

/OK now I'm going to bed.
 
2013-09-30 10:54:10 PM

Infernalist: DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?

My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.


They aren't sending anything back. That's the point. They are done. They are just appointing conferees. I'm reading that they are doing this so they can say "hey, look, we are sending conferees to agree on a budget because Harry Reid is being so unreasonable." Of course, Reid has literally been trying to send Senate conferees for MONTHS, but the GOP won't let him do it since it needs 60 votes.
 
2013-09-30 10:56:21 PM
imageshack.us
 
2013-09-30 10:57:47 PM

DamnYankees: Infernalist: DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?

My guess, eat up the clock so that they can send it back to the Senate one last time and then go home.

They aren't sending anything back. That's the point. They are done. They are just appointing conferees. I'm reading that they are doing this so they can say "hey, look, we are sending conferees to agree on a budget because Harry Reid is being so unreasonable." Of course, Reid has literally been trying to send Senate conferees for MONTHS, but the GOP won't let him do it since it needs 60 votes.


So, just setting up spin for tomorrow.  I guess we're headed for a shut down.  Sorry to all those that get hurt by this.  You can thank the GOP for being jackholes as per usual.
 
2013-09-30 10:58:00 PM

DamnYankees: This conference thing is nutballs. What the frack is the GOP thinking?


I can see the basis for your confusion lies in the above highlighted false premise.
 
2013-09-30 10:58:35 PM

Infernalist: So, just setting up spin for tomorrow.  I guess we're headed for a shut down.  Sorry to all those that get hurt by this.  You can thank the GOP for being jackholes as per usual.


Yes, by doing this the GOP has decided they would rather shut the government down than pass a clean CR. That's really what this means.
 
2013-09-30 11:01:58 PM
Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?
 
2013-09-30 11:02:03 PM
Reid announces on the Senate floor he is rejecting a conference on the CR. He's happy to go to conference (Dems have been trying to go to conference for months, the GOP has been filibustering), but he won't do it with a gun to his head on the CR.
 
2013-09-30 11:02:58 PM

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?
 
2013-09-30 11:04:32 PM

Carn: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

feckingmorons, I demand you pay for TF for me for 1 year.


Not a good analogy. You forgot to threaten something that both of you should want.
 
2013-09-30 11:04:42 PM

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


I think we covered this several thousand posts ago.
 
2013-09-30 11:05:37 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?


Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.
 
2013-09-30 11:06:19 PM

Mugato: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

I think we covered this several thousand posts ago.


Sorry, I was working most of the day and just now got to seeing Fark.  :-)
 
2013-09-30 11:06:25 PM

SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.


How so?
 
2013-09-30 11:12:49 PM

SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.


Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.
 
2013-09-30 11:14:33 PM

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


Here's the short version: What are the Democrats receiving for their capitulation? Generally negotiation involves give and take. A functioning government is something BOTH parties should want, so that's not something given by Republicans. What the Democrats have is already law, so how is this "compromise" and not "extortion?"
 
2013-09-30 11:15:27 PM

feckingmorons: You can have your own opinion. You can't have your own facts.


www.sundriesshack.com
 
2013-09-30 11:15:44 PM

vrax: SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.

Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.


Add rhetorical devices to the LOTCATGOPATA.
 
2013-09-30 11:18:38 PM

feckingmorons: Obamacare will hurt the working poor more than anyone and I don't see a lot of people realizing that.


You caring about the poor is like Kim Jong-un caring about the sick and hungry in North Korea.
 
2013-09-30 11:20:10 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: vrax: SithLord: Uranus Is Huge!: SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?

Are you ever going to stop beating your wife?

Civil disagreements aren't your strong suit I see.

Your disingenuous question didn't deserve a civil answer.

Add rhetorical devices to the LOTCATGOPATA.


Guess so!

And he still didn't answer the question.  Fishy!
 
2013-09-30 11:40:13 PM
HEALTHCARE IS NOT GOING TO BE FREE. NOONE EXPECTS IT TO BE FREE AND IT IS NOT REASONABLE TO EXPECT IT TO BE FREE.
 
2013-09-30 11:40:47 PM

feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.


They made demands and offered up nothing in return.  There is nothing to compromise on...
 
2013-10-01 12:06:44 AM

shadow9d9: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

They made demands and offered up nothing in return.  There is nothing to compromise on...


Acording to Republicans, "Allowing the government to continue to function" is a compromise, and is in no way similar to a lunatic holding someone hostage.
 
2013-10-01 12:08:16 AM

LordJiro: Acording to Republicans, "Allowing the government to continue to function" is a compromise, and is in no way similar to a lunatic holding someone hostage.


And what's not being mentioned enough - functioning at GOP levels! Look at this chart of CR amounts, and remember what the fark the GOP is fighting about.

pbs.twimg.com
 
2013-10-01 12:17:05 AM

feckingmorons: HeartBurnKid: feckingmorons: I see the headline has it well put. The House proposed something, the Senate said no.

The senate didn't say, well can we delay it for 3 months? Can we compromise on something, they just said no. They have made up their minds not to negotiate and yet people fault the House.

The United States does not negotiate with terrorists.

Yes, several people have made that argument, Republicans have also been called arsonists, anarchists, extortionists, black mailers, hostage takers and an assistant to President Obama even went so far as to say they won't negotiate with 'People with bombs strapped to their chests."

I'm not certain if it is hyperbole or lunacy, but I suspect the latter. The name calling, especially after a Democratic call for more civil discourse after Rep. Giffords was shot, is fanning the flames.


They've threatened to destroy the economy if they don't get exactly what they want.  What else would you call them?


feckingmorons: No one can say in good conscience there is nothing wrong with Obamacare.


Conversely, no one can say in good conscience that it's worse than what we had before.
 
2013-10-01 01:11:17 AM

Kit Fister: Lee Jackson Beauregard: Dancin_In_Anson: So with single payer, there are no questions asked. You show up, you're ushered in, you get "the same high quality healhtcare" and you physician gets a check. Let's say that I'm unemployed, overweight, eat unhealthy food, smoke like a chimney, don't wear a seat belt etc etc etc...You feel that you are morally responsible to take care of me no questions asked.

As it stands, you go to the emergency room and they patch you up, they send you a bill you can't pay and the rest of us pay through higher hospital bills, either directly or by way of higher premiums.  Healing the patient properly will cost less in the end than putting out fires in the emergency room.

You may argue from moral hazard.  Moral hazard is a fine argument when speaking of speculators getting bailed out by the taxpayers, but it applies at most feebly to health care.  All the single payer in the world won't heal a damaged heart or get you out of a wheelchair.  Unhealthy lifestyles are still going to get you.

Funny when I couldn't pay they sent me to collections, ruined my credit score, and threatened to sue. Maybe its because I'm white.


I'll assume arguendo that you're talking about an emergency room visit.  How much did they actually collect?  If the answer is less than 100%, the rest of us still paid through higher hospital bills.  No, I'm not judging you; you did what you had to do.
 
2013-10-01 01:16:03 AM
imageshack.us
 
2013-10-01 01:18:35 AM

SithLord: Well Democrats, are you gonna own this shutdown or are you gonna blame the House for something the Democrat-controlled Senate didn't wish to compromise on?


If you have a plate with four cookies, and one child wants all four and the other is willing to accept two and let the first one have two, you do not "compromise" by giving three cookies to the bully.
 
2013-10-01 08:43:12 AM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: I'll assume arguendo that you're talking about an emergency room visit. How much did they actually collect? If the answer is less than 100%, the rest of us still paid through higher hospital bills. No, I'm not judging you; you did what you had to do.


Oh they got it all. All $60k worth.
 
2013-10-01 10:52:49 PM

HeartBurnKid: They've threatened to destroy the economy if they don't get exactly what they want.  What else would you call them?


Government shut down, Dow Jones UP, Nasdaq UP, S&P 500 UP.

What exactly is your point?
 
Displayed 407 of 407 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report