Florida State Seminoles

[Jungle Rat]

Politics make me laugh.

[Owlman]

Fox News mistakenly airs parody of Obama offering to personally fund Muslim museum

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/fo ... 37793.html

[innocentbystander]

This shutdown has much lighter-weight players than the one in 1995-96.

Clinton > Obama and Newt >>> Boehner.

true. but...

ACA & Debt Ceiling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>important>>>>>>>>>>>>> anything in 1996

[Owlman]

Ha. You've been suckered to believe this is about the ACA.

[10ac]

Exactly. The government is going to run it. What could possibly go wrong?

[Owlman]

???

[innocentbystander]

Ha. You've been suckered to believe this is about the ACA.

[youtube]zf4Xm8V6UHA[/youtube]

Get. Informed.

[Bklyn]

You've missed Owl's point, regardless of the merits - or lack thereof - of your YouTube clip.

I lack the inclination to help clear it up for you.

[sardis]

I disagree with Owlman that this isn't about the ACA. The R's are holding the debt ceiling and budget hostage for a delay in ACA. The R's hope that the longer you delay the better chance ACA falters. It is the las gasp for R's to save this country from another entitlement program which gradually leads to the erosion of this country.

And I support their efforts, BTW.

[Toemeesleather]

http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world ... s-bay-area

[Bklyn]

A better plan would be to win the Senate in 2014 and the White House in '16. They've (almost) totally blown those chances by pulling this shit that they have and the accompanying optics associated with their constantly changing narrative. This was the wrong way to go about dismantling the ACA after the results of the 2008 election, the 2012 election and the Supremes decision. Horrible politics and horrible brand management.

The bad decision is evident by the cannibalizing that is going on within the party now. Wrong move at the wrong time.

[hedge]

If I end up having to pay $410 a month, they might get my vote, though...

[Bklyn]

I would be surprised if you did have that premium.

I don't know enough about the products offered in the exchanges, so I have sat on the sidelines with my commentary on it. However, I would be surprised if a basic plan was that much more in the exchange...and I would need to understand why that was the case.

Does the level of participation in the exchanges impact the cost within those exchanges?

[eCat]

I'm just amazed that this legislation is setup to where the only people that are coming out ahead (and ahead is relative) are the people that have to qualify for a government subsidy to get the insurance.

If you don't qualify for the subsidy, you're fucked - and at this point, I don't think there is any debate about it.

The Affordable care act is about as insulting in name as the Patriot Act. Its created these standard levels of insurance that fall into 3 categories - its better than if you couldn't afford insurance before (those with subsidies who didn't have insurance) or about the same level for those that had cost effective insurance before but its more expensive than what they had before (because the basic no frills insurance now has to cover the cost of government mandated frills), and for those that had HMOs, PPO's and other forms of employer subsidized insurance, what you had before is now beyond your reach and what you are offered now is more in line with the crap ass insurance the poorest Americans are receiving. the HMO and PPO plans would be considered "platinum" on the exchange - and it clear, you don't even hear people talking about signing up for "platinum" who are considering the exchanges.

So the ACA 's result is that everyone is pushed down into the same level of insurance coverage - either by subsidy from the government, or by pricing out the individual who would have had better - and its because of the mandates invoked by the coverage.

There is nothing affordable about the affordable care act, unless you are around the poverty line in this country.

Who in the United States would believe that crafting something that takes away quality insurance from what I suspect is going to be well over 100 million Americans by this time next year and replace it with high deductible insurance that is provided to everyone (that no one except the people that were able to afford the good insurance before can afford) is a good idea. This whole concept is a complete failure.

And I'm sure Spacer is going to give some 1 sentence statement that deals directly with how the 44 million who didn't have it before are benefiting from this, but its completely at the expense of the 100million + who had good insurance that by these new numbers was affordable before.

Seriously to fuck this up this bad and still have belief that government involvement in this or just about anything else is a good thing is beyond being myopic, its just showing a bias while ignoring any rational view of the majority being affected.

It sucks that there are a large number of people in this country that don't have the ability to pay for good health care. But the LAST thing you do is fuck it up for the 100m+ that do have it. And this is exactly what has happened. When you talk about the people that are using the exchanges, you are excluding every person that has company provided health care because they aren't allowed to use the exchange. Any discussion about what the exchange does or doesn't do for people while ignoring what the mandates of the ACA have done to the people that had traditional insurance prior to the exchanges coming online is just disingenuous.

This will not get better, the government options for bronze, silver, platinum and gold are already out of touch for people that don't get government subsidies and the price is not going to go down. And the people that have insurance plans that met their needs that were company provided are having to sacrifice the quality of health care available to them - in terms of dollars and accessibility in order to allow people who didn't have health care to get on "common plans"

Its absurd, its poorly conceived, poorly planned and it shows just how incompetent Obama and Congress was at enacting a plan that was specifically targeting a select group of people without having any thought (or at least public acknowledgement) of how it was going to affect the majority. But the American public bought into it because Obama promised you could keep your plans, you could keep your doctors and you were going to save money. That is pure fiction - and in my mind, it borders on criminal incompetence to put that out there as a political ploy to push legislation so that you would have a defining historic moment of your presidency.

[Bklyn]

Everything you said makes sense, if it is true. I guess I will need to start researching...but I know I won't be able to for another couple of months.

My insurance doesn't change, so it's not as pressing for me. But, I need to be on top of my debate game...and I won't choose a side I don't believe in. So, I still have to sit a bit silent on the specifics and my total position.

[eCat]

I would be surprised if you did have that premium.

I don't know enough about the products offered in the exchanges, so I have sat on the sidelines with my commentary on it. However, I would be surprised if a basic plan was that much more in the exchange...and I would need to understand why that was the case.

Does the level of participation in the exchanges impact the cost within those exchanges?

the only thing that saves these plans is the maximum out of pocket spending caps. Basically, if you don't qualify for a government subsidy and you don't have company provided healthcare - and you have serious medical issues, then your health care plan is your monthly premium and the cost of the cap - which I believe is $6350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family - or if you are healthy, then its your monthly premium and whatever you spend on your deductible over the course of the year. If you were on the hook for thousands of dollars a year for health care AND you didn't have company provided insurance, this is a godsend - yet you're still spending essentially a Hyundai Sonata every year on health care for your family. That doesn't really seem like a solution to me other than keeping health care providers and insurance companies in liquidity.


so really, I think you could make the argument that this whole thing is setup to favor the poorest, sickest people in the United States under the age of 62 because the healthiest people weren't worried about not having health insurance to begin with (except now they are mandated to have it) and the real beneficiaries are the health care providers that are now guaranteed an income stream and insurance companies that will be getting checks from the government to cover the gaps of the poorest people paying in. Yes, I realize health care providers are taking hits as well with reduced payouts and they are struggling with that now but it doesn't change that when someone walks in that door, they know they are getting paid for them whereas before it was hit or miss.

[eCat]

its obvious I'm very pissed about this

but mainly because I can't believe just how wrong the pundits and supporters were about the results of this. I'm not repeating GOP talking points. I'm talking from experience and to others who are facing the same situation.

yes, its early but I think its clear there is potentially serious fallout for the middle class from this, and I'm just not ready to hear how the poor are benefiting from it if no one (other than the GOP hardliners) are acknowledging its at the expense of the middle class.

If gas goes up to $5 a gallon that adds what? an additional $1200 a year in cost to the average commuter which puts the economy into a stall...can you imagine what paying an additional $300 a month for healthcare is going to do?

[innocentbystander]

You've missed Owl's point, regardless of the merits - or lack thereof - of your YouTube clip.

I lack the inclination to help clear it up for you.

I'm guessing you lack a lot of things. Inclination to do the simplest task is not the least of them.

This is for our kids, yours and mine. A ponzi scheme by any other name is still a ponzi scheme. Our kids get screwed by the ACA (the same way they get screwed by SS, Medicare, and Medicaid) because they don't vote and don't count. Someone has to speak for them. That is what is happening now with the shutdown of the government.

I hope they default on the debt. End WIC now (sorry ladies, no more government checks for you, marry the baby daddies instead and have them support their own kids.) Why do we need the Department of Education? Department of Energy? Department of Labor? All of it is bullshit. You are all fired, go get real jobs.

[eCat]

You've missed Owl's point, regardless of the merits - or lack thereof - of your YouTube clip.

I lack the inclination to help clear it up for you.

I'm guessing you lack a lot of things. Inclination to do the simplest task is not the least of them.

This is for our kids, yours and mine. A ponzi scheme by any other name is still a ponzi scheme. Our kids get screwed by the ACA (the same way they get screwed by SS, Medicare, and Medicaid) because they don't vote and don't count. Someone has to speak for them. That is what is happening now with the shutdown of the government.

I hope they default on the debt. End WIC now (sorry ladies, no more government checks for you, marry the baby daddies instead and have them support their own kids.) Why do we need the Department of Education? Department of Energy? Department of Labor? All of it is bullshit. You are all fired, go get real jobs.

You cannot create a nation of people that are dependent on a service and immediately take it away. While it sounds good to just end something, if you have any compassion as a human in this country, you can't just end something like W.I.C.
Last night 60 minutes had a story how the number of people on disability has skyrocketed to where the program is now spending $135b a year and a significant percentage - estimated as high as 50% wouldn't even qualify for it. Its a direct result of a bad economy - you lose your job, your unemployment runs out , you're over the age of 40 and now you have no options to get income.

I guess what I'm saying is you have to address why we have a W.I.C. program, why we have a disability program, and if your answer is "there are alot of welfare frauds out there that are lazy Americans", then you're not addressing the problem - you're just throwing out a cliche' that makes you and other like minded folks feel good about getting up and going to work.

I am thankful that the occupy wall street event happened because it really made me think about the whole 99% issue in this country. The host of our problems all stem from the 99/1% problem and until that is addressed, we're going to continue to have bloated government programs that are ineffectively serving the population at large - at least until the country as a whole collapses from the weight caused from it.

The flipside of this is regardless of what you think, you are a minority in addressing this situation. The heartland people will never be able to elect into office a small government/small program person until the inequalities in our current democracy are addressed. Until we get back to a structure where every American has a realistic chance to obtain the American dream - whatever that is defined, people will continue to vote for candidates who use the government dole as an equalizer between the classes.

When you stand up and say that a person who is a product of our public education system isn't qualified to earn a living wage, when you support a legislative approach to allows business to hold congress hostage by leveraging jobs against wages, and stockholder profits against regulation, then you are perpetuating the problem that your are railing against.

There is going to be a major reset that realigns the 99%/1% in the near future - its happened twice in the previous century and as a result the country had middle class growth and a closure in the gap between the wealthiest and poorest Americans.
America deals with class warfare thru political legislation, not revolution, not by cutting vast numbers of the neediest Americans, but by addressing why we are continually increasing the number of neediest Americans in the first place.

[innocentbystander]

I'm guessing you lack a lot of things. Inclination to do the simplest task is not the least of them.

This is for our kids, yours and mine. A ponzi scheme by any other name is still a ponzi scheme. Our kids get screwed by the ACA (the same way they get screwed by SS, Medicare, and Medicaid) because they don't vote and don't count. Someone has to speak for them. That is what is happening now with the shutdown of the government.

I hope they default on the debt. End WIC now (sorry ladies, no more government checks for you, marry the baby daddies instead and have them support their own kids.) Why do we need the Department of Education? Department of Energy? Department of Labor? All of it is bullshit. You are all fired, go get real jobs.

You cannot create a nation of people that are dependent on a service and immediately take it away. While it sounds good to just end something, if you have any compassion as a human in this country, you can't just end something like W.I.C.
Last night 60 minutes had a story how the number of people on disability has skyrocketed to where the program is now spending $135b a year and a significant percentage - estimated as high as 50% wouldn't even qualify for it. Its a direct result of a bad economy - you lose your job, your unemployment runs out , you're over the age of 40 and now you have no options to get income.

I guess what I'm saying is you have to address why we have a W.I.C. program, why we have a disability program, and if your answer is "there are alot of welfare frauds out there that are lazy Americans, then you're not addressing the problem.

I am thankful that the occupy wall street event happened because it really made me think about the whole 99% issue in this country. The host of our problems all stem from the 99/1% problem and until that is addressed, we're going to continue to have bloated government programs that are ineffectively serving the population at large - at least until the country as a whole collapses from the weight caused from it.

Single moms NEVER had access to welfare or public housing until the 1960s. They knew then that if you pay for something you get more of it.

We have WIC because LBJ and his "Great Society." All that is, is government marrying single moms instead of the father's who impregnated them with the little bastards.

[youtube]xEUvdREeSmE[/youtube]

This is horseshit, but this is what happens when you have a society that sees nothing of value in men beyond semen and being an ATM.

We have to stop this madness. Personal responsibility.