Because it's not fair that some have saved money and earned a good amount, and they have options those who have done neither don't have? Remember, we're dealing with a President who doesn't really care about results, but more about what's "fair", even if it costs money to do it.
Rather than paying $300,000, you and your wife would have had to come to terms that her time on Earth was now limited because you simply were not rich enough. Happens every day on this planet.
...in the Third World and the United States.
You can include Canada and the UK in that list as well...
Health insurance isn't really insurance though (more's the pity), it's the powerful negotiator at the pricing table. Without it, you pay about triple.
I was always able to negotiate lower costs of dental care and routine physicals, when I self-insured. Pay cash, work out a deal, and it was lower cost than what insurance would cost. Did that for 10 years without much of an issue - just carried catastrophic health insurance with a $10,000 deductible that covered 100% above that level (which sounds extreme, but actually ends up being a better deal than the new Obamacare plans I have to choose from).
My doctors were always willing to bargain for cash-up-front - saved them a lot of costs and headache and waiting on payment for 60-90 days from the insurance company. Cash-up-front does wonders in more than just buying cars and homes...
Are you sure? The harder they fail at fixing the current mess, the harder it'll be for them to get hired afterwards. Nothing disillusions the supporters of a broken system like its colossal, unmitigated, blatant failure.
In total agreement.
Both sides are constantly blaming the other for the deadlock in Congress. They haven't passed a budget since April 2009. That is one of the things the Constitution requires them to do, and they haven't done their job in almost five years.
Actually, a budget was passed in the middle of FY2011, and again in FY2012 and FY2013 There were no budgets in FY2009 and FY2010 - years that coincide with Democrat control of Congress.
Even more to the point, only if you drive on public roads (don't need insurance to drive on private roads). Furthermore, at least here in California you can legally self-insure and not buy car insurance. That option isn't available in Obamacare - even if you're insanely wealthy like Gates, Brin, or Zuckerberg and can easily afford to pay for your own medical care - you can't. You have to buy insurance regardless of ability to pay for your own costs.
In a perfect libertarian world, an insurance company offering you a policy would have to abide by the terms of the policy, and if the terms prohibited them from kicking you off, then they couldn't do so.
There are approximately 254 million passenger vehicles in the US, so the odds of your car bursting into flame from a fuel tank/fuel line problem is roughly one in 84,700. Given that there are approximately 21,000 Tesla model S cars out there right now, this one fire represents an energy-source fire rate approximately 4 times that of standard automobiles.
How is spending an additional $180 billion that we have to borrow from other nations going to help our debt? This is $180 billion in additional deficits.
Can't do it. Spending bills - by law - can only deal with spending. The Democrats could offer a bill that tripled the funding for the ATF, or eliminated it altogether - but they cannot enact gun control. Likewise with the current situation - Obamacare is not being eliminated, it's being defunded; well, the last offer was to defund it for a year (giving individuals the same extension that the President gave to corporations).
Are you really so obsessed about the tiny percentage going to humanitarian programs? The vast majority of your taxes goes to the military, and the (distant) second largest chunk goes to the retired. I think we can probably stand to cut military spending a percentage or two before we chuck your mother or grandparents out on the street, don't you?
I usually ignore ACs, but in this case your lie really needs correcting. Tied for first place is pensions (Social Security) and health (Medicare); defense is 3rd place.
Well, looking at the US deficit and debt, one could argue that the Tea Party might be loonies but at least it isn't their policy to spend their grandchildren's earnings.
It wasn't Bill Clinton's policy to spend his grandchildren's earnings either. He left office with the budget in balance.
Did he? What was the last year the national debt went down? If the national debt didn't go down - but went up - then how could we have a balanced budget or even a surplus?
That's the basis for what is happening now. Obamacare will increase our debt at least $180 billion over the next 10 years. It's not going to help our budget situation at all, and the President unilaterally (and, most likely, illegally) delaying implementation of just parts of the bill doesn't help either.
Ok, can we cut even a tiny portion of the US defence budget, cut all subsidies to oil companies, and repeal the tax exempt status of religious "charities" that are politically active, and repeal the Bush tax cuts on the top 10%?
Those are some cuts we can get behind. The current "the government is taking your money and spends wastefully!" nonsense is just to push through ridiculous things like defunding NPR as a proposed way to balance the budget, while leaving things like the DoD's budget as a sacred cow.
You may want to check what the sequester did - it was heavily targeted on the DOD. The issue is that Federal spending on social welfare has grown unsustainable, well beyond what inflation and population growth should require, and constitutes over 60% of the entire Federal budget - basically consuming 100% of our tax revenues. Everything else - the DOD, USDA, FBI, DEA, Air Traffic Controllers, USCIS, foreign "aid" - is funded with debt.
SILENCE! There's a GOP-bash going on, we can't have facts! Now go away, before I have to tell you that I pay $326/month and have access to surgery as quickly as needed (and I'm a resident of California, to boot).
You did not get what Obama wanted (a proper, public health care system like NHS), you got what Republicans wanted, called it "Obamacare" and now Republicans don't even want that being passed.
Don't you Americans read news or watch newspapers? I am shocked with the level of misinformation when it comes to your own laws.
Here's a fact you might want to consider: not a SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted for Obamacare. It was 100% the President and the Democrats. And "compromises" in the bill were 100% to buy in Democrat politicians, not the Republicans.
Perhaps your news is lacking, leading to your level of misinformation.
We've done it before in a booming economy, and survived... and the real threat is that the same people will use the same terrorist tactics on the debt ceiling, which really would be pretty catastrophic.
Why should the debt ceiling increase? It's settled law, and the President signed it. The debt ceiling we have should not need to be raised.
Oh, you mean that line of argument only works for Obamacare, and not for anything else that the Senate passed and the President signed?
Hello? Can you stop spending and start paying back instead=/The rest of the world
No. We have free phones and food stamps for all to give out. You should be happy you're financing our lifestyle - you watch our TV and movies, after all...
Actually, it's past time for ALL the law to go into effect; the President unilaterally decided to delay parts of the law. The GOP is simply holding the President's feet to the fire and saying "if you want to unilaterally ignore the will of Congress, the law you signed, and delay the part of the law that required participation by businesses, then you now have to delay the part that requires participation by individuals".
And in two years, once the Surface 2 gets certified, what happens? Delta is now flying with 2 year old technology... whoopie.
If two years scares you, I pray you NEVER look at the age of some of the flight electronics in the cockpit. Some of those designs and products are over two decades old!
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think there is a PPACA exception for individuals to self-insure; companies can self-insure but individuals, TTBOMK cannot.
Because it's not fair that some have saved money and earned a good amount, and they have options those who have done neither don't have? Remember, we're dealing with a President who doesn't really care about results, but more about what's "fair", even if it costs money to do it.
Rather than paying $300,000, you and your wife would have had to come to terms that her time on Earth was now limited because you simply were not rich enough. Happens every day on this planet.
...in the Third World and the United States.
You can include Canada and the UK in that list as well...
Health insurance isn't really insurance though (more's the pity), it's the powerful negotiator at the pricing table. Without it, you pay about triple.
I was always able to negotiate lower costs of dental care and routine physicals, when I self-insured. Pay cash, work out a deal, and it was lower cost than what insurance would cost. Did that for 10 years without much of an issue - just carried catastrophic health insurance with a $10,000 deductible that covered 100% above that level (which sounds extreme, but actually ends up being a better deal than the new Obamacare plans I have to choose from).
My doctors were always willing to bargain for cash-up-front - saved them a lot of costs and headache and waiting on payment for 60-90 days from the insurance company. Cash-up-front does wonders in more than just buying cars and homes...
Are you sure? The harder they fail at fixing the current mess, the harder it'll be for them to get hired afterwards. Nothing disillusions the supporters of a broken system like its colossal, unmitigated, blatant failure.
In total agreement.
Both sides are constantly blaming the other for the deadlock in Congress. They haven't passed a budget since April 2009. That is one of the things the Constitution requires them to do, and they haven't done their job in almost five years.
Actually, a budget was passed in the middle of FY2011, and again in FY2012 and FY2013 There were no budgets in FY2009 and FY2010 - years that coincide with Democrat control of Congress.
Dissent is patriotic - Hillary Clinton
Here's your list of Senators to tar-and-feather. And here's your list of Representatives to treat likewise. Not to mention the President who signed it into law. A good portion of Congress opposed the law - but partisanship ruled the day (in fact, the only bipartisan thing about Obamacare was in OPPOSITION to it, not in favor).
Even more to the point, only if you drive on public roads (don't need insurance to drive on private roads). Furthermore, at least here in California you can legally self-insure and not buy car insurance. That option isn't available in Obamacare - even if you're insanely wealthy like Gates, Brin, or Zuckerberg and can easily afford to pay for your own medical care - you can't. You have to buy insurance regardless of ability to pay for your own costs.
In a perfect libertarian world, an insurance company offering you a policy would have to abide by the terms of the policy, and if the terms prohibited them from kicking you off, then they couldn't do so.
There are approximately 254 million passenger vehicles in the US, so the odds of your car bursting into flame from a fuel tank/fuel line problem is roughly one in 84,700. Given that there are approximately 21,000 Tesla model S cars out there right now, this one fire represents an energy-source fire rate approximately 4 times that of standard automobiles.
How is spending an additional $180 billion that we have to borrow from other nations going to help our debt? This is $180 billion in additional deficits.
Can't do it. Spending bills - by law - can only deal with spending. The Democrats could offer a bill that tripled the funding for the ATF, or eliminated it altogether - but they cannot enact gun control. Likewise with the current situation - Obamacare is not being eliminated, it's being defunded; well, the last offer was to defund it for a year (giving individuals the same extension that the President gave to corporations).
Who will give my money to people who don't work?
Are you really so obsessed about the tiny percentage going to humanitarian programs? The vast majority of your taxes goes to the military, and the (distant) second largest chunk goes to the retired. I think we can probably stand to cut military spending a percentage or two before we chuck your mother or grandparents out on the street, don't you?
I usually ignore ACs, but in this case your lie really needs correcting. Tied for first place is pensions (Social Security) and health (Medicare); defense is 3rd place.
It was also quite heavily supported by the Democrats in the House... It was a real bipartisan bill.
Well, looking at the US deficit and debt, one could argue that the Tea Party might be loonies but at least it isn't their policy to spend their grandchildren's earnings.
It wasn't Bill Clinton's policy to spend his grandchildren's earnings either. He left office with the budget in balance.
Did he? What was the last year the national debt went down? If the national debt didn't go down - but went up - then how could we have a balanced budget or even a surplus?
That's the basis for what is happening now. Obamacare will increase our debt at least $180 billion over the next 10 years. It's not going to help our budget situation at all, and the President unilaterally (and, most likely, illegally) delaying implementation of just parts of the bill doesn't help either.
Ok, can we cut even a tiny portion of the US defence budget, cut all subsidies to oil companies, and repeal the tax exempt status of religious "charities" that are politically active, and repeal the Bush tax cuts on the top 10%?
Those are some cuts we can get behind. The current "the government is taking your money and spends wastefully!" nonsense is just to push through ridiculous things like defunding NPR as a proposed way to balance the budget, while leaving things like the DoD's budget as a sacred cow.
You may want to check what the sequester did - it was heavily targeted on the DOD. The issue is that Federal spending on social welfare has grown unsustainable, well beyond what inflation and population growth should require, and constitutes over 60% of the entire Federal budget - basically consuming 100% of our tax revenues. Everything else - the DOD, USDA, FBI, DEA, Air Traffic Controllers, USCIS, foreign "aid" - is funded with debt.
SILENCE! There's a GOP-bash going on, we can't have facts! Now go away, before I have to tell you that I pay $326/month and have access to surgery as quickly as needed (and I'm a resident of California, to boot).
You did not get what Obama wanted (a proper, public health care system like NHS), you got what Republicans wanted, called it "Obamacare" and now Republicans don't even want that being passed. Don't you Americans read news or watch newspapers? I am shocked with the level of misinformation when it comes to your own laws.
Here's a fact you might want to consider: not a SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted for Obamacare. It was 100% the President and the Democrats. And "compromises" in the bill were 100% to buy in Democrat politicians, not the Republicans.
Perhaps your news is lacking, leading to your level of misinformation.
We've done it before in a booming economy, and survived... and the real threat is that the same people will use the same terrorist tactics on the debt ceiling, which really would be pretty catastrophic.
Why should the debt ceiling increase? It's settled law, and the President signed it. The debt ceiling we have should not need to be raised.
Oh, you mean that line of argument only works for Obamacare, and not for anything else that the Senate passed and the President signed?
Hello? Can you stop spending and start paying back instead= /The rest of the world
No. We have free phones and food stamps for all to give out. You should be happy you're financing our lifestyle - you watch our TV and movies, after all...
America
Actually, it's past time for ALL the law to go into effect; the President unilaterally decided to delay parts of the law. The GOP is simply holding the President's feet to the fire and saying "if you want to unilaterally ignore the will of Congress, the law you signed, and delay the part of the law that required participation by businesses, then you now have to delay the part that requires participation by individuals".
And in two years, once the Surface 2 gets certified, what happens? Delta is now flying with 2 year old technology... whoopie.
If two years scares you, I pray you NEVER look at the age of some of the flight electronics in the cockpit. Some of those designs and products are over two decades old!
Wesley Snipes.
Mr. Hefner does not like you laughing at his grotto, no matter how many weiners may be present.