Let's cut Medicaid to pay for Obamacare, but we'll mandate the states have to maintain and even raise Medicaid levels. We'll let the states puzzle out where to get the funds.
Now, the result is, that if you make $9,500 a year, and live in a state without the added medicaid, you will not be eligible for government subsidies on the health exchange. So you will have to pay that $8,900 health insurance out of you meager $9,500 annual income or face a $900 fine.
Ya......um, brilliant, shiny, like a brillo pad on raw flesh...great job Congress.
That's probably because Imperial America also allows your country not to have to worry about defending itself and maintain a small token military. Just saying...
$3.1 billion in lost government services - what did this include? the numerous websites that were taken down deliberately without need? the fact that crab fisherman couldn't receive their quotas? these are failings of being wholly too reliant on government, worse and poorly run government. There is no reason fisherman should of had to stop working. Seriously, there should of been a plan that simply outlined the contingency of the catch.
$152 million per day in lost travel spending - remember, most of the shut down travel areas were shut down merely for spite, not as a result of the government shutdown. These actions were never taken during the prior 17 shut-downs.
$217 million per day in lost federal and contractor wages - which are all now being paid, in fact most contractors were still working because their projects are funded by pre-allocated fixed price contracts.
Now, the real question you have to ask yourself is why the hell the Federal government has to approve every single new beer recipe, label and what not. If there is anything this government shut down has shown, it is just how pervasive, invasive, and hideous our government institution is at present.
But relax all, we still got to golf, right?
***
If our economy takes that huge of GDP drop from such a meager shutdown, than we have far far more problems economically.
Boston proved that the government is NOT concerned about foriegn terrorism. Its efforts are focused on domestic threats to its power.
The U.S. government was warned twice about the Boston Bomber but didn't put any effort to investigate. This went beyond what the electronic monitor should of picked up. This was a direct alert. We ignored it. We really don't care if a muslim jihadist bombs America. That's beneficial, they get to strengthen their power base.
We're concerned about the Tea Party, OWS, and the total terror to the government. The idea that those two might realize they're both fighting largely for the same thing. And that the Tea Party and OWS have more in common with each other than either has with the Repudemocraticans.
Then we'd realize that our elections were fraudulent. And when polls say 70% support GMO labeling in California ballot measure. And then the results are the measure loses and only garners 30%. Really, the polls were off by a 40 percentage point shift?
Mostly...fresh unicorn blood. And a crapload of middle men.
Trust me, you can have.gov paying $150,000 for a contractor to a big firm. Which then hires a smaller sub-contracting firm. Who then may even have to pay a third company who holds the H1B visa. And in the end the level 3 Java developer is earning a meager $50K.
And thank you for taking the time to write out a much longer response that covered much of what I wanted to say in my last reply but was to busy to type.
I'm sorry that you're uneducated. First, you tell me why 200 years ago we wrote "I love you" as "I loue yov" and then I shall respect any complaint you have against grammer. Why were u's v's and v's u. Hence a a double-u "W" in fact looks like to V's.
Much of our grammar are recent accruments to the English language. Many are in fact poorly enacted. I am quite fond of the Internet's destruction on present English grammar because it has jump started the evolution of English once more.
And most grammar nazis would be hard pressed to meet their own standard of excellence on the use of commas, semi-colons, dashes, long dashes, etc.
The point is that I conveyed a thought. My statement used while in after its conjunction form of contrast, akin to whereas. And yes, there is an extraneous but, I guess I put that there for all the nazi asses. Or more likely, I just wrote that while taking a short break from my daily tasks. And started with one thought and quickly changed the wording and forgot to remove an extraneous but.
Granted, I could have re-read what I typed, in which case I'd likely have fixed it. I could of spent a few extra minutes to achieve a great work of grammar. But it was a simple reply on Slashdot. And I usually take for granted the intelligence of most slashdot readers to be able to understand the gist of the thought regardless of the occasional typo or grammar error. Perhaps because I assume that most computer programmers are smart, intelligent and busy people who understand that we are often just interjecting quickly and no big deal if there is a minor spelling mistake.
But there, all the grammar asses now have an extraneous "but" to criticize.
Frankly my dear, I have no respect for the intelligence of any man who cannot spell a multi-syllable word at least three different ways.
And I'll respect English grammar when the English language respects phonetics.
Seriously, we could start by calling it fonetics. Next thing I know you'll complain about the phont I used to type this reply.
Oh, that's right....if I have the power to do something, than I have the right to do it. Might = Right.
I mean my private phone calls use a private company - no rights there. If I use a public road, that allows me to be monitored.
Seeing as I pay taxes to the government for my house, it really truly is THEIR property. So they should be able to search it any time they bloody well please.
Sorry sir, rights are intended to prevent a government doing wrongful actions regardless of if they have the power. If a woman walks stark naked down the street. It doesn't mean you have the right to have non-consensual sex.
All security protections can and will be defeated. We are approaching the point where we will be able to read and monitor brains themselves. What then, will the government have a right to listen to my brain because I didn't secure my brain waves.
Yes, its a slippery slope argument. But if you look at the history of government, it ALWAYS winds up on the bottom of the slope. So in this case, its not fallacy, it is a factually supported and documented pattern.
You see, you are supposed to use the new Obamacare Healthcare.gov site to get your officialized care plan and see one of our approved drug advisors (psychiatrists), who will then vouch for you to purchase some meth from government licensed drug dealers. Providing profits to those major drug cartels willing to donate to the political campaigns of our politicians (Pfizer, Bayer, etc.)
But how many military/spy satellites did NASA launch into orbit. Then let's re-evaluated the definition of a military organization. NASA is clearly at least a hybrid entity. And I 3 NASA
They are listening to your phone calls, reading your emails, and recording all your chats. They are monitoring your vehicle movements. How is that not totalitarianism?
Slashdot Mirror
Let's cut Medicaid to pay for Obamacare, but we'll mandate the states have to maintain and even raise Medicaid levels. We'll let the states puzzle out where to get the funds.
Uh, Supreme Court, that's unconstitutional...uh...well...um....
*pin drop*
Now, the result is, that if you make $9,500 a year, and live in a state without the added medicaid, you will not be eligible for government subsidies on the health exchange. So you will have to pay that $8,900 health insurance out of you meager $9,500 annual income or face a $900 fine.
Ya......um, brilliant, shiny, like a brillo pad on raw flesh...great job Congress.
That's probably because Imperial America also allows your country not to have to worry about defending itself and maintain a small token military. Just saying...
Okay, let's look at this with some Reason.
$3.1 billion in lost government services - what did this include? the numerous websites that were taken down deliberately without need? the fact that crab fisherman couldn't receive their quotas? these are failings of being wholly too reliant on government, worse and poorly run government. There is no reason fisherman should of had to stop working. Seriously, there should of been a plan that simply outlined the contingency of the catch.
$152 million per day in lost travel spending - remember, most of the shut down travel areas were shut down merely for spite, not as a result of the government shutdown. These actions were never taken during the prior 17 shut-downs.
$217 million per day in lost federal and contractor wages - which are all now being paid, in fact most contractors were still working because their projects are funded by pre-allocated fixed price contracts.
Now, the real question you have to ask yourself is why the hell the Federal government has to approve every single new beer recipe, label and what not. If there is anything this government shut down has shown, it is just how pervasive, invasive, and hideous our government institution is at present.
But relax all, we still got to golf, right?
***
If our economy takes that huge of GDP drop from such a meager shutdown, than we have far far more problems economically.
Clearly, what they demonstrated was that the mice would go for the item with the highest density of calories & fat.
Duh...
Now make it really interesting, replace rice patty with a peanut butter cup. And it's an all out rat race.
It's personal security that is important...
Boston proved that the government is NOT concerned about foriegn terrorism. Its efforts are focused on domestic threats to its power.
The U.S. government was warned twice about the Boston Bomber but didn't put any effort to investigate. This went beyond what the electronic monitor should of picked up. This was a direct alert. We ignored it. We really don't care if a muslim jihadist bombs America. That's beneficial, they get to strengthen their power base.
We're concerned about the Tea Party, OWS, and the total terror to the government. The idea that those two might realize they're both fighting largely for the same thing. And that the Tea Party and OWS have more in common with each other than either has with the Repudemocraticans.
Then we'd realize that our elections were fraudulent. And when polls say 70% support GMO labeling in California ballot measure. And then the results are the measure loses and only garners 30%. Really, the polls were off by a 40 percentage point shift?
Mostly...fresh unicorn blood. And a crapload of middle men.
Trust me, you can have .gov paying $150,000 for a contractor to a big firm. Which then hires a smaller sub-contracting firm. Who then may even have to pay a third company who holds the H1B visa. And in the end the level 3 Java developer is earning a meager $50K.
No, not really....
And thank you for taking the time to write out a much longer response that covered much of what I wanted to say in my last reply but was to busy to type.
I'm sorry that you're uneducated. First, you tell me why 200 years ago we wrote "I love you" as "I loue yov" and then I shall respect any complaint you have against grammer. Why were u's v's and v's u. Hence a a double-u "W" in fact looks like to V's.
Much of our grammar are recent accruments to the English language. Many are in fact poorly enacted. I am quite fond of the Internet's destruction on present English grammar because it has jump started the evolution of English once more.
And most grammar nazis would be hard pressed to meet their own standard of excellence on the use of commas, semi-colons, dashes, long dashes, etc.
The point is that I conveyed a thought. My statement used while in after its conjunction form of contrast, akin to whereas. And yes, there is an extraneous but, I guess I put that there for all the nazi asses. Or more likely, I just wrote that while taking a short break from my daily tasks. And started with one thought and quickly changed the wording and forgot to remove an extraneous but.
Granted, I could have re-read what I typed, in which case I'd likely have fixed it. I could of spent a few extra minutes to achieve a great work of grammar. But it was a simple reply on Slashdot. And I usually take for granted the intelligence of most slashdot readers to be able to understand the gist of the thought regardless of the occasional typo or grammar error. Perhaps because I assume that most computer programmers are smart, intelligent and busy people who understand that we are often just interjecting quickly and no big deal if there is a minor spelling mistake.
But there, all the grammar asses now have an extraneous "but" to criticize.
Frankly my dear, I have no respect for the intelligence of any man who cannot spell a multi-syllable word at least three different ways.
And I'll respect English grammar when the English language respects phonetics.
Seriously, we could start by calling it fonetics. Next thing I know you'll complain about the phont I used to type this reply.
Oh, well, that is called Oligarchy.
Where an elite caste is privileged over the masses.
Oh, that's right....if I have the power to do something, than I have the right to do it. Might = Right.
I mean my private phone calls use a private company - no rights there.
If I use a public road, that allows me to be monitored.
Seeing as I pay taxes to the government for my house, it really truly is THEIR property. So they should be able to search it any time they bloody well please.
Sorry sir, rights are intended to prevent a government doing wrongful actions regardless of if they have the power. If a woman walks stark naked down the street. It doesn't mean you have the right to have non-consensual sex.
All security protections can and will be defeated. We are approaching the point where we will be able to read and monitor brains themselves. What then, will the government have a right to listen to my brain because I didn't secure my brain waves.
Yes, its a slippery slope argument. But if you look at the history of government, it ALWAYS winds up on the bottom of the slope. So in this case, its not fallacy, it is a factually supported and documented pattern.
You see, you are supposed to use the new Obamacare Healthcare.gov site to get your officialized care plan and see one of our approved drug advisors (psychiatrists), who will then vouch for you to purchase some meth from government licensed drug dealers. Providing profits to those major drug cartels willing to donate to the political campaigns of our politicians (Pfizer, Bayer, etc.)
But how many military/spy satellites did NASA launch into orbit. Then let's re-evaluated the definition of a military organization. NASA is clearly at least a hybrid entity. And I 3 NASA
And I'll point out that while WWII started in 1939, but the precepts behind the rise of the Nazis started much earlier.
Totalitarianism does not require mass murder. Especially if the populace is obedient to the authority.
They are listening to your phone calls, reading your emails, and recording all your chats. They are monitoring your vehicle movements. How is that not totalitarianism?
Republican's request to delay by one year looks like it would of been a prudent decision.
I know...all those private colleges and universities totally suck. I mean, who would ever want to hire someone from Harvard, Yale, Princeton or MIT.
State college grads are where its at!!!!
Yup...
But I remember liking the movie. But I was young.
Now you just defined the U.S. army. :-P
When you were going to respond, but someone already said and did it better...good reply above.
With police you pay and still get nothing. At least with pay police, if you pay, and get nothing, you can stop paying.
Yup
Unarmed security guards usually make $10-$12/hr
Because in some places, citizens have begun to do just that. Lay down their own pavement to fill potholes.
Where do you live? and are you sure?
I'd really be surprised if any small city didn't have one at this point.