RE: 2016 Wave

RE: 2016 Wave (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

popeye1250 -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/23/2013 12:23:08 PM)
Phydeaux, the "HIDE" or "BLOCK" button is your best friend.

thompsonx -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/23/2013 3:15:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, you have till March to sign up to avoid the penalty. Nah I got the same coverage as congress so I am not subject to the aca.

thompsonx -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/23/2013 3:17:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Phydeaux, the "HIDE" or "BLOCK" button is your best friend. You are absolutely right..."a man's got to know his limitations."

thompsonx -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/23/2013 3:31:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Ah but dims trolls are marching in lockstep... Onward! Name calling seems to make up such a significant portion of your post that there seems little space left for facts. Ah thompsonx, usually your posts are so far beneath notice I just skip 'em. But this was so amusing, I'll make an exception. You snip 1 line out of a 21 line post and say there seems little space left for facts. And miss the irony completely. Truly, thank you for the laugh. As if the other lines were less than vacuous,inane drivel. To have posted them would have been a waste of bandwidth.

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/24/2013 12:54:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: joether Oh, an a strong 50% in the 18-29 year olds approve of the President's job. I don't know where your getting your information from.... So in a mountain full of shit, you found a cherry. Congratulations. The rest of the world is completely aware that your post is dumpster diving - and is laughing. No cherry picking here. Gallup has been a pretty conservative based news reporting group for decades now. Their information is usually pretty solid and credible. Your viewpoint is apparently wrong when the evidence is presented. You in turn, handled it by behaving like a little child in your post here. Which has become the normal experienced by many posters on this forum when they have had interactions with you.

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/24/2013 1:01:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, you have till March to sign up to avoid the penalty. March 31st of 2014 to be exact. There will be another round of sign ups beginning, I believe in mid February (the 15th?). This will hopefully help any remaining stragglers to sign up before the deadline and incur the penalty.

papassion -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/24/2013 11:45:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, you have till March to sign up to avoid the penalty. March 31st of 2014 to be exact. There will be another round of sign ups beginning, I believe in mid February (the 15th?). This will hopefully help any remaining stragglers to sign up before the deadline and incur the penalty. And you seriously believe that the under 35 year old segment, who still think they are immortal and don't need healthcare, will suddenly panic because of a 95 or so dollar penalty? And sign up to pay large premiums so the older people will get cheaper insurance? You forget that Liberals are for everything as long as it doesn't cost ME! And these young people know that for this to work, it will cost ME

papassion -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/24/2013 11:59:03 AM)
The only ones signing up will be the low value, low responsibility, low income people and thus will qualify for government subsidies. Then be dumb enough to post on here about how Obamacare got them low premiums! Thus telling everyone you rank low on the totem pole of jobs and pay.

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 12:58:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, you have till March to sign up to avoid the penalty. March 31st of 2014 to be exact. There will be another round of sign ups beginning, I believe in mid February (the 15th?). This will hopefully help any remaining stragglers to sign up before the deadline and incur the penalty. And you seriously believe that the under 35 year old segment, who still think they are immortal and don't need healthcare, will suddenly panic because of a 95 or so dollar penalty? And sign up to pay large premiums so the older people will get cheaper insurance? You forget that Liberals are for everything as long as it doesn't cost ME! And these young people know that for this to work, it will cost ME 1 ) Your responding to the wrong post. This one does not take about the issue your talking on. This one if you had slowed down and READ the post, would realize its about the next date to acquire a health plan if one does not already hold one by the final date before the penalty is issued. 2 ) Your perceptions of people are just that.....perceptions. Most 18-29 year olds, when responding to Gallup stated they approve of the President's job. It does not state whether they are obtaining a healthcare plan or not. In fact those with parents that have healthcare plans can 'ride along' under than until the age of 26. Some I'm sure some of them believe they are immortal. 3 ) Here is a question since you think you know what your talking about. Why did the administration NOT place the penalty for the next income statement for $695 or 2.5% of gross income (which ever is higher) for this year and NOT for 2015? An do you know where the funds obtained through the penalty goes? Into funding NEXT YEAR's subsidies for those with Bronze and Silver plans. The administration knew there was stiff opposition to the ACA back in 2009. So while people are taking the penalty in some 'lame' attempt at protesting the ACA, they are actually helping the process beyond what the Administration would have figured three years ago. If they were to REALLY protest, they would obtain the healthcare plan through the exchanges there by creating the need for more money from the penalties in the following year. So when the news is published of just how many took the penalty, you'll hear it in joy-ish tones from FOX News and other conservative media sources. What they will NOT say, is that those paying the penalty just helped out the ACA. That would be the actual truth of the matter. I sometimes REALLY have to laugh at the 'low information voter' in the United States.....

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 1:06:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The only ones signing up will be the low value, low responsibility, low income people and thus will qualify for government subsidies. Then be dumb enough to post on here about how Obamacare got them low premiums! Thus telling everyone you rank low on the totem pole of jobs and pay. How little you actually understanding anything on this subject. The ones that are signing up and not taking the penalty are, get this....FOLLOWING THE LAW. That's right, they are 'honest and law abiding citizens'. They understand the wisdom in having a healthcare plan in the event things go South during the year for their health or their loved ones. When you speak on who is obtaining bronze to platinum plans, you are simply displaying how much your part of the 'low information voter' pool in this nation.

sloguy02246 -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 12:12:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The only ones signing up will be the low value, low responsibility, low income people and thus will qualify for government subsidies. Then be dumb enough to post on here about how Obamacare got them low premiums! Thus telling everyone you rank low on the totem pole of jobs and pay. Sir, with all respect: I believe that with this post, you have clearly demonstrated tremendous disdain and contempt for people much less fortunate than yourself. "...low value, low responsibility, low income people..." is how you view them? And then you speak about these people being, "...dumb enough to post on here...Thus telling everyone you rank low on the totem pole..."? Just reminding you - again, respectfully - there is more than one totem or standard available to use for comparison of one person's worth to another's - or to yours. Your post speaks volumes about a narrow and self-righteous standard you apparently favor.

truckinslave -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 4:14:33 PM)
It continues to get worse and worse... a new CNN poll reports highest-ever disapproval and lowest-ever support. Synopsis on The Blaze Full poll from CNN Wait until it cancels or drives up the cost of employer-provided plans.......

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 5:08:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave It continues to get worse and worse... a new CNN poll reports highest-ever disapproval and lowest-ever support. Synopsis on The Blaze Full poll from CNN Wait until it cancels or drives up the cost of employer-provided plans....... "As you may know, a bill that makes major changes to the country's health care system became law in 2010. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor or generally oppose it?" (from your source) Here's a question, truckin. How many Americans have actually sat down and READ the bill from cover to cover? That have taken the time to fully study the law, regardless of where they sit with the whole of this issue? My guess would be less then 8% of those 18+. So the information the other 92% are obtaining is by third to fifth hand. Someone reads it, someone edits it, and someone releases a condensed version of what the first person wrote to the public. How inherently dangerous does this sound to you? That people really do not understand very much about a bill they support/oppose. People oppose this bill straight down political lines, but do not have a clue what is actually within the document. Heck, they want to go back to a previous system that was causing more problems then helping. That is one definition of 'insanity' from a financial standpoint. Why did policies get cancelled? Go ask people that oppose the ACA what a healthcare policy needs to have in order to be grandfathered under the ACA. Observe how many say 'I don't know'. Compare that to the number that give you the actual reasons. What are some examples? You can not offer a policy to one age group and a higher/lower level to another. Nor one price for males and another for females. Or for race. This is discrimination not allowed in any other industry in the USA, so why was it allowed in the health insurance industry for so long? Most people were not even aware of these differences in policy pricings. The point here is, there is a huge pile of just plain...DUMB...Americans. Many more in conservative circles than anywhere else. What is the point of truly being free when you are told how to think and vote because your to dumb and foolish to do it yourself?

Phydeaux -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 5:26:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: papassion quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Actually, you have till March to sign up to avoid the penalty. March 31st of 2014 to be exact. There will be another round of sign ups beginning, I believe in mid February (the 15th?). This will hopefully help any remaining stragglers to sign up before the deadline and incur the penalty. And you seriously believe that the under 35 year old segment, who still think they are immortal and don't need healthcare, will suddenly panic because of a 95 or so dollar penalty? And sign up to pay large premiums so the older people will get cheaper insurance? You forget that Liberals are for everything as long as it doesn't cost ME! And these young people know that for this to work, it will cost ME 1 ) Your responding to the wrong post. This one does not take about the issue your talking on. This one if you had slowed down and READ the post, would realize its about the next date to acquire a health plan if one does not already hold one by the final date before the penalty is issued. 2 ) Your perceptions of people are just that.....perceptions. Most 18-29 year olds, when responding to Gallup stated they approve of the President's job. It does not state whether they are obtaining a healthcare plan or not. In fact those with parents that have healthcare plans can 'ride along' under than until the age of 26. Some I'm sure some of them believe they are immortal. 3 ) Here is a question since you think you know what your talking about. Why did the administration NOT place the penalty for the next income statement for $695 or 2.5% of gross income (which ever is higher) for this year and NOT for 2015? An do you know where the funds obtained through the penalty goes? Into funding NEXT YEAR's subsidies for those with Bronze and Silver plans. The administration knew there was stiff opposition to the ACA back in 2009. So while people are taking the penalty in some 'lame' attempt at protesting the ACA, they are actually helping the process beyond what the Administration would have figured three years ago. If they were to REALLY protest, they would obtain the healthcare plan through the exchanges there by creating the need for more money from the penalties in the following year. So when the news is published of just how many took the penalty, you'll hear it in joy-ish tones from FOX News and other conservative media sources. What they will NOT say, is that those paying the penalty just helped out the ACA. That would be the actual truth of the matter. I sometimes REALLY have to laugh at the 'low information voter' in the United States..... Idiotic shallow analysis. The penalty is low in the first year, of course to reduce political opposition to the bill. However; to suggest that the $95 penalty will come anywhere near recouping the money that having people buy into obamacare would is ridiculous. To suggest that $3600 or more in revenues is match by a $95 penalty. And of course there are numerous exemptions to get out of the $95 penalty. Besides. The best way to screw with obamacare is sign up. Wait. Pay one premium. Wait 89 days. Pay another premium. Wait 89 days. In the meantime use as much medical services as you can. Its more stupidity from the administration. In an effort to retain subscribers, insurers are (now) encouraged to not cancel you unless you are 90 days or more past due.... Finally - why should young people pay for this crap. They can still go the ER and get health care free.

Phydeaux -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 5:39:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave It continues to get worse and worse... a new CNN poll reports highest-ever disapproval and lowest-ever support. Synopsis on The Blaze Full poll from CNN Wait until it cancels or drives up the cost of employer-provided plans....... "As you may know, a bill that makes major changes to the country's health care system became law in 2010. Based on what you have read or heard about that legislation, do you generally favor or generally oppose it?" (from your source) Here's a question, truckin. How many Americans have actually sat down and READ the bill from cover to cover? That have taken the time to fully study the law, regardless of where they sit with the whole of this issue? My guess would be less then 8% of those 18+. So the information the other 92% are obtaining is by third to fifth hand. Someone reads it, someone edits it, and someone releases a condensed version of what the first person wrote to the public. How inherently dangerous does this sound to you? That people really do not understand very much about a bill they support/oppose. People oppose this bill straight down political lines, but do not have a clue what is actually within the document. Heck, they want to go back to a previous system that was causing more problems then helping. That is one definition of 'insanity' from a financial standpoint. Why did policies get cancelled? Go ask people that oppose the ACA what a healthcare policy needs to have in order to be grandfathered under the ACA. Observe how many say 'I don't know'. Compare that to the number that give you the actual reasons. What are some examples? You can not offer a policy to one age group and a higher/lower level to another. Nor one price for males and another for females. Or for race. This is discrimination not allowed in any other industry in the USA, so why was it allowed in the health insurance industry for so long? Most people were not even aware of these differences in policy pricings. The point here is, there is a huge pile of just plain...DUMB...Americans. Many more in conservative circles than anywhere else. What is the point of truly being free when you are told how to think and vote because your to dumb and foolish to do it yourself? The fact is you don't know shit. Again. To quote a few examples: quote: This is discrimination not allowed in any other industry Wrong. How much does a ladies hair style cost. How much a man's. How much does a ladies dry cleaning cost. How much a man's. How much does it cost a lady during happy hour. How much a man? It is the law of the land that so long as their is a valid economic reason for disrimination along gender or age lines, that companies are free to do so. With exceptions for locations that dims have control, of course. quote: Here's a question, truckin. How many Americans have actually sat down and READ the bill from cover to cover? That have taken the time to fully study the law, regardless of where they sit with the whole of this issue? My guess would be less then 8% of those 18+. So the information the other 92% are obtaining is by third to fifth hand. Someone reads it, someone edits it, and someone releases a condensed version of what the first person wrote to the public. How inherently dangerous does this sound to you? That people really do not understand very much about a bill they support/oppose So let me get this straight. Its ok for politicians (ie., you have to pass the bill to know whats in it) - but its dangerous for voters. Sure sounds like dimocratic shrillery to me. But it is the height of stupidity to suggest that you have to read 2900 pages of bill and 10,000 pages of attendant regulations to know whether you support a bill or not. In fact, I would suggest it defeats the purpose of a republic, and the concept of enlighted self interest. All a person really has to know is: This premium costs me $x a month more. And they can make a judgement from that. You might not like the fact thats true: in fact you would rather believe that al kinds of attendant good things will follow including unicorn fairies. But most people know better. And thats not the only reason to hate this bill. Libertarians hate it for increasing the role of government. The religious hate it for a lack of a religious exception. Fiscal conservatives hate it for increasing the deficit. Spare me your drivel that it wont. Of course it will. Doctor's hate it for the effect on their practice. There are hundreds of good reasons to hate this bill. None of them require reading. Just like passing the bill didn't. Not that it really matters all that much whats in the bills. Obozo is making it mean what he wants it to mean anyway.

truckinslave -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/25/2013 7:22:22 PM)
quote: My guess would be less then 8% of those 18+. So the information the other 92% are obtaining is by third to fifth hand. Someone reads it, someone edits it, and someone releases a condensed version of what the first person wrote to the public. How inherently dangerous does this sound to you? My guess is that your numbers are far too high. Not for the general population, mind you; 8% is too high for the people writing the regulations pursuant to the law, and for the people responsible for enforcing the law. For a fact, as I recall, 0% of the people who voted it into law read it. For a fact the so-called president who signed it into law hasn't read it. How inherently dangerous does that sound to you?

mnottertail -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/26/2013 8:25:16 AM)
For a fact, as I recall, 0% of the people who voted it into law read it. For a fact the so-called president who signed it into law hasn't read it. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^These are not facts,merely hallucinatory masturbations.

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/26/2013 11:23:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux The penalty is low in the first year, of course to reduce political opposition to the bill. So what your saying is the liberal administration is a forgiving one, and their opponents are harsh and draconian..... quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux However; to suggest that the $95 penalty will come anywhere near recouping the money that having people buy into obamacare would is ridiculous. To suggest that $3600 or more in revenues is match by a $95 penalty. Back in 2010 when the bill was passed into law, most did not think about how many would take the penalty or not. As time went by, more and more conservative media sites began to preach of taking the penalty rather than purchasing healthcare as a form of protest. Which is kind of dumb and unwise. The penalty was believed back in 2010 to off set some of the costs. Now it might off set a very healthy chunk of the costs. Its a case of 'if we only knew then what we know now'. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux And of course there are numerous exemptions to get out of the $95 penalty. There is only nine (to my knowledge). An its not getting out of the penalty, its being required to have a healthcare coverage if you meet the requirements under the law. The only way you get out of a penalty is in a court case with a good lawyer. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Besides. The best way to screw with obamacare is sign up. Wait. Pay one premium. Wait 89 days. Pay another premium. Wait 89 days. An that is pretty inefficient on your wallet. More so after that $4,000 hospital bill two months after you paid once. Only takes one injury or illness to wipe your bank account out without health coverage. That is a hell of a gamble to make in a given year. An when you understand the human condition, it becomes ever unwise as one ages to go without it. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux In the meantime use as much medical services as you can. Its more stupidity from the administration. In an effort to retain subscribers, insurers are (now) encouraged to not cancel you unless you are 90 days or more past due.... An that's a bad thing for Americans how? Are you so against your fellow American's health that you would side with those that profit from the suffering? quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Finally - why should young people pay for this crap. They can still go the ER and get health care free. Yes, but that then costs the government money. You like other conservatives are HEAVILY against the government spending money on inefficient things, right? Its more efficient to have a good understanding of one's body condition on numerous levels (in terms of dollars and cents). An how young is young? Is age 27 young? Since that is the age most who do not have it prior to that age would be require to prove they have obtained health coverage. An why should they do it? BECAUSE ITS THE LAW! Since Mass Health went into effect, the ER's in the state could focus more on emergency situations rather than as a clinic for the uninsured. Or are you against emergency rooms being use for emergency situations?

joether -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/27/2013 12:42:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Its ok for politicians (ie., you have to pass the bill to know whats in it) - but its dangerous for voters. Sure sounds like dimocratic shrillery to me. Its not 'ok' in either case. I would expect anyone voting on the bill either way to have a good enough understanding to pass the exam on the bill with a 85%. Most bills are structured in a similar manner. Its like reading the Wall Street Journal. There are effective ways of reading it quickly and then there is alternative publications for everyone else. When a bill comes up that REALLY has the nation's attention, would it make sense to read the bill? Whether 'for' or 'against'? So that you the citizen understand what's really written. Hell, if I had my way, I would require any online publication to place a link to the House or Senate bill that is being talked about. Its a real pain in the ass to look it up sometimes. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux But it is the height of stupidity to suggest that you have to read 2900 pages of bill and 10,000 pages of attendant regulations to know whether you support a bill or not. The bill is 2409 pages long, not 2900. If you eliminate the following sections: Introduction, Law Interactions, Glossary of Terms, Index, Appendix, Graphs, Charts, and Amendments. Then remove the 2 inch margins on all sides down to 1 inch, single space and double sided printing, that's about 600-800 pages. That's the equivalent of the 'Game of Thrones' novel. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux In fact, I would suggest it defeats the purpose of a republic, and the concept of enlighted self interest. All a person really has to know is: This premium costs me $x a month more. And they can make a judgement from that. You might not like the fact thats true: in fact you would rather believe that al kinds of attendant good things will follow including unicorn fairies. Unicorn faries? That a four hit dice monster? It does not defeat the purpose of a Republic. As times have gotten more sophisticated, so has everything else whether we like it or not. Since simple laws are often easy to circumvent, creating loopholes and degrees of unethical behavior that has more than once cost Americans greatly in financial and legal terms. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux And thats not the only reason to hate this bill. Libertarians hate it for increasing the role of government. The religious hate it for a lack of a religious exception. Fiscal conservatives hate it for increasing the deficit. Spare me your drivel that it wont. Of course it will. Doctor's hate it for the effect on their practice. Large numbers of Libertarians and 'fiscal conservatives' voted for Republicans that nearly and completely destroyed the whole nation on multiple fronts. The Deficit was created and the debt enlarged thanks to these two groups. These two groups scream and holler at every penny Democrats spend but write blank checks when Republican/Tea Party do the same. Case in point, 43 attempts to defund the Affordable Care Act, KNOWING, each would fail in the Democratic Controlled Senate. Why did the House waste government money and time pursuing something that would fail? Where was all the out crying and demands from conservatives/libertarians over all these events? One could drop a pin in that room.... There is an exemption in the ACA for religious reasons, IF, the organization can show its across the board and not in clusters or groups. They have to show the evidence, NOT, the US Government. That is pretty tough to do. One example that I think has this exemption is the Amish. Doctors hate the law insofar that it should have been better. Many more doctors, nurses, and others in the healthcare industry really desire to TREAT THE PATIENT rather than dealing with the business side of cost. But that is impractical in our society. So, they have to learn this stuff. Fortunately there are groups that have been created since the law's passage that go to doctor's offices to explain to the people how it works. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux There are hundreds of good reasons to hate this bill. None of them require reading. Just like passing the bill didn't. Not that it really matters all that much whats in the bills. Obozo is making it mean what he wants it to mean anyway. Yes, the bill did not accomplish what the President would have liked it to do. Or Democrats, or Liberals. In fact, much of the bill was material straight out of the Republican Party playbook on healthcare reform during the early years of the new millennium. An if Democrats knew then what they know now, they would have just pass the President's bill and told the Republican/Tea Party to go to hell! I really do not care what conservatives/libertarians believe is bad about the healthcare bill. They are automatically opposed to ANYTHING the President does or states. An yet, demand Americans vote Republican/Tea Party into office after how deeply they fucked this nation up in the not to distant past.

popeye1250 -> RE: 2016 Wave (12/27/2013 12:53:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 Phydeaux, the "HIDE" or "BLOCK" button is your best friend. You are absolutely right..."a man's got to know his limitations." Well gee Thompson old bean, some in here don't know what limitations are, do they? They use threads to attack different posters, (tos), they insult people instead of discussing the thread, they call people names. If someone were to call (you) a racist then (you) automatically win the argument. As for the blue wave in 2016, Hillary? Ha, she couldn't even beat Obama of the 57 states! And if "Obamacare" is such a "good" thing why are so many people and groups trying to be "exempted" from it? You'd think they'd want in right away! Seems they don't want anything to do with it but they want to tell you to do it! That never works out good for "you" does it? Funny, the biggest proponents of "Obamacare" are now the ones who want to steer well clear of it.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625