Announcement by Obama to allow insurance to continue to sell old policies...

[ginwilly]

I read the initial proposed bill, it wasn't nearly that big.

There's about 200 pages worth that was tied to the stimulus (HITECH/Meaningful Use) that I have had to become very familiar with for job reasons and it's taken 3 years to even come close to having it down. I couldn't imaging trying to sift through all of that with any level of comprehension. I give you props for trying.

 

[canndo]

There's about 200 pages worth that was tied to the stimulus (HITECH/Meaningful Use) that I have had to become very familiar with for job reasons and it's taken 3 years to even come close to having it down. I couldn't imaging trying to sift through all of that with any level of comprehension. I give you props for trying.

If that picture is real, then it must surely include the entire body of each other law that was affected by the AHCA. I did not go to that depth, locating the affected law, the chapter, paragraph, sentence and sometimes even word that was changed was too much for me.

 

[NLXSK1]

If that picture is real, then it must surely include the entire body of each other law that was affected by the AHCA. I did not go to that depth, locating the affected law, the chapter, paragraph, sentence and sometimes even word that was changed was too much for me.

There are now more than 11 million words encompassing the affordable care act. I think it might be bigger than the tax code already. It is certainly bigger than any 1 human can possibly read and understand which should make it unconstitutional to start with.

 

[canndo]

There are now more than 11 million words encompassing the affordable care act. I think it might be bigger than the tax code already. It is certainly bigger than any 1 human can possibly read and understand which should make it unconstitutional to start with.

I believe I can agree that any law that is not understanable by a reasonably informed, intelligent individual should not, on its face be constitutional but how would that be measured? I honestly thought I understood the draft of the afordable care act. I read it as a revolt against all of the unsolicited e-mail being circulated at the time that pretended to "read it and interpret it for you". I found that while nothing in those emails were outright lies, the misinformation was monumental. I could not, nor could anyone else, project the reactions of the powerful organizations and people who wanted the status quo to stand, even if it meant misinforming the populace. I could not have forseen the failure of the web delivery system nor the mass issuance of termination notices, my family and my self being recipients.

 

[greenlikemoney]

• Obama finally tells the truth, admitting that "I caused the $24,000,000,000 shutdown!
  

  Washington DC President-in-disguise Barack Obama, during a televised news conference today, came clean with the American people, admitting that he, and he alone, was the cause of the estimated $24,000,000,000 government shutdown last month.
  
  While speaking contritely, instead of his usual "fuck you, look at me" attitude, Obama has decided that the Republicans were correct in wanting to delay the individual mandate for one year while Barack & Co. fixed their $1,000,000,000 Tonka Toy website. Obamas decision to not negotiate with Republicans on this issue was the sole cause of the Government shutdown. The shutdown now appears that it could have been averted by negotiating and agreeing on the same thing proposed by the Republicans, which was dismissed by Obama, but that now Obama sees as a last ditch effort to save his failing, signature plan.
  
  While Republicans have scheduled a vote tomorrow on "fix" to Baracks debacle, Democrats are also working on a motion to be included in tomorrows discussions. Of course, these motions never pass, but at least the Democrats can say "Well, we tried, but those damn Republicans are just hell bent on destroying this country".
  
  In related news, Michelle Obama has booked the family Christmas trip, estimated to cost the American taxpayer well over a million dollars. You mad bro?​

  
  
  ​

 

[NLXSK1]

I believe I can agree that any law that is not understanable by a reasonably informed, intelligent individual should not, on its face be constitutional but how would that be measured? I honestly thought I understood the draft of the afordable care act. I read it as a revolt against all of the unsolicited e-mail being circulated at the time that pretended to "read it and interpret it for you". I found that while nothing in those emails were outright lies, the misinformation was monumental. I could not, nor could anyone else, project the reactions of the powerful organizations and people who wanted the status quo to stand, even if it meant misinforming the populace. I could not have forseen the failure of the web delivery system nor the mass issuance of termination notices, my family and my self being recipients.

We can look at this bill and both agree it is unreadable and un understandable for the average citizen.

The tax code is the same way.

Maybe we cannot agree on an exact definition today but we sure can start moving the bar back toward sanity.

 

[UncleBuck]

There are now more than 11 million words encompassing the affordable care act. I think it might be bigger than the tax code already. It is certainly bigger than any 1 human can possibly read and understand which should make it unconstitutional to start with.

11 million is way up from the 3 million words that some similar retarded chicken little was squawking about just the other day.

kinda reminds me of how 500,00, no 3.5 million, no 5 million, no 80 million, no 100 million, no 160 million people will lose their insurance due to obamacare!

ONOZ!

and constitutionality being contingent on number of words?

well, that just is a depressing statement about how truly stupid and hopeless some people are.

the content of the constitution matters, not word count.

 

[ginwilly]

or like created or saved 4 million jobs!!

 

[UncleBuck]

or like created or saved 4 million jobs!!

seeing as how the supposed number of people kicked off insurance went up from hundreds of thousands to a few million to a hundred million over a tiny, tiny fraction of time while the number of jobs created or saved has remained steady over the course of years, there is about as much arithmetic equivalence there as there is moral equivalence in comparing a civil rights leader to a former KKK grand wizard.

 

[ginwilly]

seeing as how the supposed number of people kicked off insurance went up from hundreds of thousands to a few million to a hundred million over a tiny, tiny fraction of time while the number of jobs created or saved has remained steady over the course of years, there is about as much arithmetic equivalence there as there is moral equivalence in comparing a civil rights leader to a former KKK grand wizard.

Lighten up Alice. It would have been more tomorrow if He didn't save us from Himself today. 100 million seems high, the numbers from the CBO was 70 million I think. But as you said, everyone's plans get cancelled every year so 100M is probably low.

I will continue to compare Al Sharpton to David Duke, they are very comparable. Sharpton is many things, an opportunist, a race baiter, a greedy money grubber, a liar, a womanizer, but one thing he most certainly is NOT and that's a civil rights leader.

 

[UncleBuck]

I will continue to compare Al Sharpton to David Duke

can't stop stupid when stupid is determined to be stupid.

 

[ginwilly]

can't stop stupid when stupid is determined to be stupid.

You defend that racist piece of shit and call him a civil rights leader? Why doesn't that surprise me.

We had a race incident a few years back where blacks felt they were being treated unfairly in court after a race riot broke out at a DQ. They called Sharpton to come down and get some exposure. He wanted 100k or no go. Yeah, that's your guy. Their cause was righteous... for 100k.

 

[UncleBuck]

We had a race incident a few years back where blacks felt they were being treated unfairly in court...

yeah, blacks never get treated unfairly in court.

they just "feel" that way.



well played today. you really showed me a lot.

 

[ginwilly]

yeah, blacks never get treated unfairly in court.

they just "feel" that way.



well played today. you really showed me a lot.

They may very well have been, the evidence strongly suggested they were. You gloss over the fact that your leader Sharpton didn't think so unless he got paid 100k. This is the man you hold in high regard. Sharpton is a racist money grubbing prick.

And you lack enough character to address the post with honesty. I guess that's all you have left.

I wasn't there, so I'm not going to state is as fact like some race baiters do. From what i've been told it was most likely though.

 

[UncleBuck]

Sharpton is a racist money grubbing prick.

he sounds like a dedicated capitalist to me. you'd call him a job creator if he were white.

and i've never seen the guy speak so strongly against civil rights, like you do.

but of course, he's the racist.

 

[echelon1k1]

he sounds like a dedicated capitalist to me. you'd call him a job creator if he were white.

and i've never seen the guy speak so strongly against civil rights, like you do.

but of course, he's the racist.

..........

 

[ginwilly]

he sounds like a dedicated capitalist to me. you'd call him a job creator if he were white.

and i've never seen the guy speak so strongly against civil rights, like you do.

but of course, he's the racist.

Why make that assumption about me? Sharpton uses the fear and unfortunate circumstances of those he pretends to fight for personal monetary gain. He's like Buffet in that regard and both can suck an egg. I'll make the blanket statement that if Sharpton were white you could admit what a POS of man he is.

I'm all for civil rights, you lie again. Title II does not equal civil rights, but you know that, it just sounds better when you lie to make a point. It's all you have left.

Yes, he's a racist, but even worse, he profits greatly from it.

 

[UncleBuck]

Yes, he's a racist, but even worse, he profits greatly from it.

OMFG you must be blind. you defend for profit racists endlessly.

Ron Paul Made Millions from Racist Newsletter


http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/12/18/ron-paul-made-millions-from-racist-newsletter/

 

[ginwilly]

OMFG you must be blind. you defend for profit racists endlessly.

Ron Paul Made Millions from Racist Newsletter


http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/12/18/ron-paul-made-millions-from-racist-newsletter/

Deflect! Deny! Distract!

Seriously disappointing to learn RP had a racist newsletter from you. I still like his policies, but I don't like what he said 20 years ago.

Sharpton on the other hand that you hold in such high regard;
But Efraim Lipkind, a former Hasidic resident of Crown Heights who had witnessed the riots of 1991, stated the following in a July 1994 sworn deposition: “Then we had a famous man, Al Sharpton, who came down, and he said Tuesday night, kill the Jews, two times. I heard him, and he started to lead a charge across the street to Utica.”

Sharpton characterized Gavin Cato’s death as being not merely the result of a car accident, but rather “the social accident of apartheid.”[7] And we do know that Sharpton challenged local Jews—to whom he derisively referred as “diamond merchants”—to “pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house” to settle the score.[8] And we do know that, stirred in part by such rhetoric and false accusations, hundreds of Crown Heights blacks took violently to the streets for three days and nights of rioting, pelting Jewish homes with rocks, setting vehicles on fire, and shouting “Jew! Jew!”[9] And we do know that Sharpton’s pathetic response to the rioting was: “We must not reprimand our children for outrage, when it is the outrage that was put in them by an oppressive system.”[10] And we do know that Sharpton, while in Israel searching for the driver who had run over Gavin Cato, likened the Jewish state to “hell.”
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/articles/outragedagainsharptonrecord.html

 

[desert dude]

Because of the very nature of insurance. I am not singleing you out here, but I am surprised at how few people actually understand the concept of insurance. there are a number of ways for insurance companies to "insure" they make money. they can configure the pool of memebers they insure to those who are least likely to ever need to be compensated for their loss. (in the auto insurance industry that is called redlining). They can place caps on their payouts, both yearly and lifetime. But one of the best ways is to simply make the pool gigantic. At any one time only a small section of the entire population is in need of medical care and even more relatively rare are incidences of very expensive treatments. The majority of all medical expenses occur in the last few months of a person's life.

So, they can't figure out how to insure just a segment of the population without taxation - that is the reason for the manditory enrollment or taxation.

This is all the Heritage foundation's idea, I still can't believe that the right is so against something that is, in effect a support to insurance companies - and (perhaps) a boon to individuals.


And one more thing - this "the majority did not want it" spiel is nonsense. Firstly, it is quite obvious that "the majority" doesn't even comprehend their current, pre-obamacare policies, and they have been indoctrinated through all sorts of means. People still believe there are death panels for god sake. Secondly. We know for a fact that the majority DOES want gun control of one sort or another, but you are not willing to grant them this - are you.

Canndo, are you really going to be that openly elitist and condescending? "The poor dumb schlubs don't know what they need. Thank God we have the Democrats to make the right decisions for them".

As long as the second amendment is in place, it doesn't matter that the majority wants "gun control". The constitution is meant to be a check on tyranny by the government and "the majority". If "the majority" wants gun control then a constitutional convention is in order.