Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Pretty good article on Obamacare

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 04:38 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.
So, you are going to put blind trust in the Greedy corporate healthcare insurance industry let them decide your fate [deny you treatment] of course they have your best interests at heart.
Have cars become better, computers faster and more reliable, TV's bigger, better, and less expensive? They have all been forced to improve because of competition for the consumers money. That hasn't happened in health insurance due to the perverse nature of how the market evolved. They don't respond to the individual customer, because the individual customer isn't paying them in almost all cases.

Couple that with expecting insurance companies to pay for things better defined as entitlements (no refusal for pre-existing conditions, no coverage caps, etc) and you have destroyed any semblance of a functional business model.

I only suggest that we stop expecting insurance companies to be entitlement providers. The insurance market should be used for what it serves best: generally healthy people who fit into normal risk categories. Those with preexisting, permanent, or uninsurable conditions are going to be handled as if they are entitlement cases anyway, so let's stop hiding the costs via byzantine and wasteful arrangements like Obamacare.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 05:01 PM
quote:
Have cars become better, computers faster and more reliable, TV's bigger, better, and less expensive? They have all been forced to improve because of competition for the consumers money. That hasn't happened in health insurance due to the perverse nature of how the market evolved. They don't respond to the individual customer, because the individual customer isn't paying them in almost all cases.


That analogy doesn't hold any water. Consumer electronics and durable goods are not comparable to health care on pretty much any level. Try again.

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 05:03 PM
quote:
I only suggest that we stop expecting insurance companies to be entitlement providers. The insurance market should be used for what it serves best: generally healthy people who fit into normal risk categories. Those with preexisting, permanent, or uninsurable conditions are going to be handled as if they are entitlement cases anyway, so let's stop hiding the costs via byzantine and wasteful arrangements like Obamacare.


So repeal Obamacare and then do what exactly? NO ONE HAS AN ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 05:51 PM
quote:
quote:
I only suggest that we stop expecting insurance companies to be entitlement providers. The insurance market should be used for what it serves best: generally healthy people who fit into normal risk categories. Those with preexisting, permanent, or uninsurable conditions are going to be handled as if they are entitlement cases anyway, so let's stop hiding the costs via byzantine and wasteful arrangements like Obamacare.
So repeal Obamacare and then do what exactly? NO ONE HAS AN ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.
I just offered a solution in the simplest terms possible: let private insurers compete for customers directly in an more open market, and place all of those who don't fit into the business model of actuarial insurance (preexisting, long-term, or permanent conditions, as well as the uninsurable for whatever reason) into Medicare, raising the Medicare payroll tax to what's needed.

Maybe it would be more impressive if that were converted to 3,000 pages and presented by politicians who will never read it, but it's certainly a lot more honest than what we're doing now.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6049
(6048 all sites)
Registered: 4/18/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 09:41 PM
quote:
ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it.


Which brings the point "If it's law, then wouldn't the Obama administration have to go to Congress to make changes"?

 

____________________
All photos posted of family, friends, and places, including those of historic ABB value, by this poster are copyrighted by the poster, or posted by permission of the copywriter.
None of those photos may be reproduced for commercial gain.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 10:03 PM
quote:
The law of the land naysayers.

However, I am with the Republicans on this... all you who think health care for all is a bad idea... get sick and die.


You quote the exalted one well. In his manachean universere you either favor this ridiculous unworkable law or you oppose health care for all. No other choice no middle ground. Me good you evil. That's Obama.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 10:06 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.


Of course we could do this. Now Obama and his crew act like the alternative to this disaster is no insurance at all for anyone.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 10:07 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.

No one said Washington has to solve everything, but who else is going to address this morass? ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it. And as you or someone else already pointed out, ACA was largely written by the private insurance so no reason to think that sector would come up with anything different/better. In fact there is no reason to think the private sector, which is at least as corrupt as the public sector if not more, would development anything that puts patients/public first over their own bottom lines. So we are right back to this: if you want to repeal the ACA, you'd better have something better to replace it (or at least an idea of what something better is).

As for "what we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population" that is a bunch of BS. Healthcare reform was something that pretty much everyone said was needed for at least the last 20 years. Unfortunately no one has been able to seperate it from the politics and what we ended up with was a political compromise.



[Edited on 1/20/2014 by gondicar]


It's the law. Except for those portions Obama unilaterally decides not to enforce. If 4 years from now a Republican is the president and chooses not to enforce certain provisions I HIGHLY doubt the left would be ok with that.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 10:41 PM
quote:
Instead he's lowered himself to the Tea Party obstructionists and been little more than SOH in name only. Shutting down the gov't. was a reflection of what he should be doing? He couldn't rein in his caucus.


Sure he has. Probably why the TP is trying to oust him as Speaker.

BTW, the government was shut down today. Hard to believe we made it through the day!

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5032
(5027 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/20/2014 at 11:06 PM
I've always said that our healthcare system is a disaster because we allow people to make irresponsible and unhealthy decisions in the name of "freedom", at the expense of our nation as a whole. I'd support any type of reform that sets prices for individuals and families in relation to their lifestyle choices. I oppose healthcare being provided by employers. There may be some valid arguments in support of it, but there's something immoral about a company that lures candidates by offering healthcare. When families' lives are at stake, it shouldn't be treated the same way as a stock option.
 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 10977
(10976 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/21/2014 at 12:35 AM
quote:
quote:
The law of the land naysayers.

However, I am with the Republicans on this... all you who think health care for all is a bad idea... get sick and die.


You quote the exalted one well. In his manachean universere you either favor this ridiculous unworkable law or you oppose health care for all. No other choice no middle ground. Me good you evil. That's Obama.
YOUR USE OF THE WORDS "EXALTED ONE" to describe obama, shows what a whiner you are. we lived throgh bush, you'll live through obama.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/21/2014 at 12:43 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
The law of the land naysayers.

However, I am with the Republicans on this... all you who think health care for all is a bad idea... get sick and die.


You quote the exalted one well. In his manachean universere you either favor this ridiculous unworkable law or you oppose health care for all. No other choice no middle ground. Me good you evil. That's Obama.
YOUR USE OF THE WORDS "EXALTED ONE" to describe obama, shows what a whiner you are. we lived throgh bush, you'll live through obama.


Yes indeed. A whiner I am. How dare I criticize his royal highness.

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/21/2014 at 02:13 PM
Looks like Doug (and I) aren't the only ones thinking Obama approaches the job more like a monarch than an elected member of a government designed to have separate powers...

quote:
LIBERAL ICON URGES OBAMA IMPEACHMENT

'The most destructive, dangerous president we've ever had'


WASHINGTON — Worse than Richard Nixon. An unprecedented abuse of powers. The most un-American president in the nation’s history.

Nat Hentoff does not think much of President Obama.

And now, the famous journalist says it is time to begin looking into impeachment.

Hentoff sees the biggest problem as Obama’s penchant to rule by executive order when he can’t convince Congress to do things his way.

The issue jumped back into the headlines last week when, just before his first Cabinet meeting of 2014, Obama said, “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone … and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions.”

“Apparently he doesn’t give one damn about the separation of powers,” Hentoff told WND. “Never before in our history has a president done these things.”

And just to make sure everyone knew how extremely serious he regarded the situation, the journalist added, “This is the worst state, I think, the country has ever been in.”

Many have regarded Hentoff as the conscience of civil libertarianism and liberalism for decades.

Recognized as one of the foremost authorities on the Bill of Rights and the Supreme Court, Hentoff was a columnist and staff writer with The Village Voice for 51 years, from 1957 until 2008, when his columns began appearing in WND.

Hentoff left the Voice after he looked into the abortion industry, was shocked by what he found and had a falling-out with colleagues.

The First Amendment expert still hews left on many issues, railing against former President George W. Bush, former Vice President Dick Cheney, the prison at Guantanamo Bay and the National Defense Authorization Act.

But he hasn’t liked Obama from the start.

“Within a few months after he was elected, I wrote a column saying he was going to be the most destructive, dangerous president we’ve ever had,” he said.

Hentoff said people he’d known for years told him to stop being so negative and to give Obama a chance.

“Well, we’ve given him a chance. I understated the case a little.”

In other words, Hentoff thinks Obama is the most dangerous and destructive president ever.

And, that’s why the veteran journalist thinks it’s time to begin looking into impeachment.

“He has no right to do these executive orders,” Hentoff insisted, his voice reaching a crescendo of indignation.

He says Obama gets away with it only because there is no outrage in Congress, no coverage by the media and no knowledge by the public.

“He’s in a position now where he figures he’s going to do whatever he wants to do.”

In fact, Hentoff said, Obama doesn’t even pretend to care about the separation of powers between the executive branch and Congress anymore, because “He’s the boss and hardly anybody cares enough” to stop him.

The most well-known examples of Obama changing or issuing laws with the stroke of a pen by issuing executive orders include:

-- Delaying the employer mandate in Obamacare

-- Changing the types of plans available under Obamacare

-- Ensuring abortions would be covered under Obamacare

-- Enacting key provisions of the failed Dream Act to halt deportations of illegal immigrants

-- Enacting stricter gun-control measures

-- Sealing presidential records

-- Creating an economic council

-- Creating a domestic policy council

-- Changing pay grades

As WND previously reported, even the the far left-leaning FactCheck wrote, “It’s true that President Obama is increasingly using his executive powers in the face of staunch Republican opposition in Congress. He’s changed federal policies on immigration and welfare and appointed officials without congressional approval.”

“I would say that never before in our history had a president done these things,” Hentoff mused.

He noted that while Nixon merely claimed that winning an election gave him the right to do what he wanted, Obama is actually doing whatever he pleases.

The journalist said he doesn’t think any other president has acted so lawlessly as a matter of habit.

“So, if this isn’t a reason for at least the start of an independent investigation that would lead to impeachment, what is?”

Hentoff is baffled that Obama should escape such scrutiny when former President Bill Clinton faced impeachment just for being “a lousy liar.”

A big part of the problem, the journalist believes, is what he calls the utter ignorance of a huge portion of the population, which is not outraged at losing its basic right to be self-governing.

And Obama “doesn’t give a damn, because he can get away with whatever he wants.”

That’s why Hentoff called this the worst state the country has ever been in, “Even worse than Woodrow Wilson’s regime, when people could be arrested for speaking German.”

Compounding the problem he says, is the digital age, which has allowed the president to engage in unprecedented domestic spying with the apparatus of the National Security Agency.

WND asked if Obama really posed such a threat, considering he was a professor of constitutional law.

“People forget, he taught a course that he was not fully qualified to teach. But nobody seemed to care,” Hentoff observed.

He also pointed out that Obama was the only editor of the Harvard Law Review to never publish an article, something that went virtually unnoticed when voters considered his qualifications.

“See, that was a case of affirmative-action and people feeling, ‘Hey we ought to do something important, symbolically, and here’s a black guy, and he’s articulate, so we’re gonna do this.’”

Hentoff mentioned that former U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, the man Time Magazine once called “the most doctrinaire and committed civil libertarian ever to sit on the court,” once personally lectured him that “Affirmative-action on a racial basis is a total violation of the 14th Amendment, no doubt about it.”

And, referring to Obama’s presidency, the journalist said, “That’s what that kind of affirmative-action did for us.”

He told WND that he firmly believed the president does not care about due process, the separation of powers, the concept of a self-governing republic or many other basic American ideals.

And that’s why, he said, “What Obama is doing now is about as un-American as you can get.”

Hentoff wanted to make sure no one thought he was engaging in hyperbole.

He said it was literally true that Obama is “the most un-American president we’ve ever had.”

And just to make sure everybody heard him, he added, “I hope the FBI got all of that.”

Hentoff is just the latest public figure to be added to the growing list of those mentioning the possible impeachment of President Obama.

WND has been keeping track, and that list now includes:

Reps. Steve King, R-Iowa; Blake Farenthold, R-Texas; Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas; Rep. Bill Flores, R-Texas; Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla.; Rep. Kerry Bentivolio, R-Mich.; Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla.; Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah; Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C.; Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.; Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas; Rep. Trey Radel, R-Fla., and Rep. Ted Yoho, R-Fla.

http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/liberal-icon-urges-obama-impeachment/


 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8271
(8271 all sites)
Registered: 6/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/21/2014 at 02:20 PM
quote:
I would say the first plan should have been capitalism.

You know, real competition, not the fake "marketplace" that they call this crap.

Have hospitals actually compete with real pricing for all procedures.


Competition always wins out. It forces prices down and it improves quality.


Because the first thing you do when you have a heart attack is go shopping.

 

____________________
Capitalism will always survive, because socialism will be there to save it.

Ralph Nader's Father


 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/21/2014 at 02:30 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.

No one said Washington has to solve everything, but who else is going to address this morass? ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it. And as you or someone else already pointed out, ACA was largely written by the private insurance so no reason to think that sector would come up with anything different/better. In fact there is no reason to think the private sector, which is at least as corrupt as the public sector if not more, would development anything that puts patients/public first over their own bottom lines. So we are right back to this: if you want to repeal the ACA, you'd better have something better to replace it (or at least an idea of what something better is).

As for "what we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population" that is a bunch of BS. Healthcare reform was something that pretty much everyone said was needed for at least the last 20 years. Unfortunately no one has been able to seperate it from the politics and what we ended up with was a political compromise.



[Edited on 1/20/2014 by gondicar]


It's the law. Except for those portions Obama unilaterally decides not to enforce. If 4 years from now a Republican is the president and chooses not to enforce certain provisions I HIGHLY doubt the left would be ok with that.


So what's your point? That the left objects to things done by the right and vice versa? #newsflash

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2014 at 12:53 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.

No one said Washington has to solve everything, but who else is going to address this morass? ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it. And as you or someone else already pointed out, ACA was largely written by the private insurance so no reason to think that sector would come up with anything different/better. In fact there is no reason to think the private sector, which is at least as corrupt as the public sector if not more, would development anything that puts patients/public first over their own bottom lines. So we are right back to this: if you want to repeal the ACA, you'd better have something better to replace it (or at least an idea of what something better is).

As for "what we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population" that is a bunch of BS. Healthcare reform was something that pretty much everyone said was needed for at least the last 20 years. Unfortunately no one has been able to seperate it from the politics and what we ended up with was a political compromise.



[Edited on 1/20/2014 by gondicar]


It's the law. Except for those portions Obama unilaterally decides not to enforce. If 4 years from now a Republican is the president and chooses not to enforce certain provisions I HIGHLY doubt the left would be ok with that.


So what's your point? That the left objects to things done by the right and vice versa? #newsflash


I have never heard of a president just choosing not to enforce portions of laws he doesn't like. It's totally illegal and uncosntitutional.

 

____________________

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5748
(5755 all sites)
Registered: 2/2/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2014 at 03:57 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.

No one said Washington has to solve everything, but who else is going to address this morass? ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it. And as you or someone else already pointed out, ACA was largely written by the private insurance so no reason to think that sector would come up with anything different/better. In fact there is no reason to think the private sector, which is at least as corrupt as the public sector if not more, would development anything that puts patients/public first over their own bottom lines. So we are right back to this: if you want to repeal the ACA, you'd better have something better to replace it (or at least an idea of what something better is).

As for "what we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population" that is a bunch of BS. Healthcare reform was something that pretty much everyone said was needed for at least the last 20 years. Unfortunately no one has been able to seperate it from the politics and what we ended up with was a political compromise.



[Edited on 1/20/2014 by gondicar]


It's the law. Except for those portions Obama unilaterally decides not to enforce. If 4 years from now a Republican is the president and chooses not to enforce certain provisions I HIGHLY doubt the left would be ok with that.


So what's your point? That the left objects to things done by the right and vice versa? #newsflash


I have never heard of a president just choosing not to enforce portions of laws he doesn't like. It's totally illegal and uncosntitutional.


You lawyers are so picky (LOL) but put that way I guess this is unprecedented. Hope they take the same stance when I don't pay my income tax this year.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5032
(5027 all sites)
Registered: 12/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2014 at 05:16 PM
Wow. The melodrama is off the charts! Dangerous, destructive, illegal, unconstitutional, unamerican, impeachment, lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Give me a break.

What is your agenda? Are you looking to just blow off steam and rant to feel better? Or are you hoping to educate people on why you believe Obama is bad for the country? If you are only looking to blow off steam, then carry on. But if you are hoping to educate and sell your points, then the extreme dramatic words I listed above aren't going to get the job done. Ranting only exposes personal hatred and nothing more.

There's plenty of criticism to go around, but I'm positive you cannot give real life examples of our country being more dangerous and destroyed. I'm also certain you can take out the name "Obama", and plug in any other President's name in history and the context would still apply.

From some of the posts I've read here, it would seem as though the middle and upper class suddenly are struggling more than they ever were, to pay the bills to support Obamacare, the economy has been plunging since the 2007 crash with no end in site, millions upon millions of illegal immigrants are being welcomed into society for the first time in our history, and poor people on welfare are being encouraged to avoid work while enjoying a high quality of life, and in the 2 years left in his term, we will be an Islamic country!!

The truth is, the daily lives for people in all economic classes has not changed under Obama, with the exception of a very small percentage of people who have to choose a new healthcare plan.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/23/2014 at 01:56 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
While that's an understandable sentiment, it makes equal sense just to avoid a giant waste of time and money even if you don't have a perfect replacement solution ready to go.
How about if there is NO replcement solution whatsoever, because that is what we seem to be talking about.
Why is it necessary to have Washington solve everything? It seems to me the most preposterous belief that dysfunctional Washington could create some great solution for the country. The most corrupt, inept, and contemptible politicians in the land are going to fix 1/6th of our economy and be entrusted with your personal care? The same guys who didn't read the bill before voting on it? Doesn't that seem a little ridiculous?

What we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population. We could shut down Obamacare tomorrow and fall back on that while we decided what to do next. I still think that expanding Medicare for those already sick or uninsurable, and opening the market for more competition between insurers to cover the healthy, is the easiest way to go.

No one said Washington has to solve everything, but who else is going to address this morass? ACA is the law, so Washington has to repeal or change it. And as you or someone else already pointed out, ACA was largely written by the private insurance so no reason to think that sector would come up with anything different/better. In fact there is no reason to think the private sector, which is at least as corrupt as the public sector if not more, would development anything that puts patients/public first over their own bottom lines. So we are right back to this: if you want to repeal the ACA, you'd better have something better to replace it (or at least an idea of what something better is).

As for "what we had before, with all it's faults and problems, still suitably covered 80+% of the population" that is a bunch of BS. Healthcare reform was something that pretty much everyone said was needed for at least the last 20 years. Unfortunately no one has been able to seperate it from the politics and what we ended up with was a political compromise.



[Edited on 1/20/2014 by gondicar]


It's the law. Except for those portions Obama unilaterally decides not to enforce. If 4 years from now a Republican is the president and chooses not to enforce certain provisions I HIGHLY doubt the left would be ok with that.


So what's your point? That the left objects to things done by the right and vice versa? #newsflash


I have never heard of a president just choosing not to enforce portions of laws he doesn't like. It's totally illegal and uncosntitutional.


You lawyers are so picky (LOL) but put that way I guess this is unprecedented. Hope they take the same stance when I don't pay my income tax this year.


I wouldn't count on it.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/23/2014 at 02:00 PM
quote:
Wow. The melodrama is off the charts! Dangerous, destructive, illegal, unconstitutional, unamerican, impeachment, lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Give me a break.

What is your agenda? Are you looking to just blow off steam and rant to feel better? Or are you hoping to educate people on why you believe Obama is bad for the country? If you are only looking to blow off steam, then carry on. But if you are hoping to educate and sell your points, then the extreme dramatic words I listed above aren't going to get the job done. Ranting only exposes personal hatred and nothing more.

There's plenty of criticism to go around, but I'm positive you cannot give real life examples of our country being more dangerous and destroyed. I'm also certain you can take out the name "Obama", and plug in any other President's name in history and the context would still apply.

From some of the posts I've read here, it would seem as though the middle and upper class suddenly are struggling more than they ever were, to pay the bills to support Obamacare, the economy has been plunging since the 2007 crash with no end in site, millions upon millions of illegal immigrants are being welcomed into society for the first time in our history, and poor people on welfare are being encouraged to avoid work while enjoying a high quality of life, and in the 2 years left in his term, we will be an Islamic country!!

The truth is, the daily lives for people in all economic classes has not changed under Obama, with the exception of a very small percentage of people who have to choose a new healthcare plan.



The truth is that Hentoff is correct. Obama is doing things that are unprecedented. And he is setting a precedent that is terrible for the country because it is undermining the very notion of separation of powers. You can dismiss it however you want but it is reality. He is a lawless president.

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8497
(8498 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/23/2014 at 02:24 PM
quote:
quote:
Wow. The melodrama is off the charts! Dangerous, destructive, illegal, unconstitutional, unamerican, impeachment, lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Give me a break.

What is your agenda? Are you looking to just blow off steam and rant to feel better? Or are you hoping to educate people on why you believe Obama is bad for the country? If you are only looking to blow off steam, then carry on. But if you are hoping to educate and sell your points, then the extreme dramatic words I listed above aren't going to get the job done. Ranting only exposes personal hatred and nothing more.

There's plenty of criticism to go around, but I'm positive you cannot give real life examples of our country being more dangerous and destroyed. I'm also certain you can take out the name "Obama", and plug in any other President's name in history and the context would still apply.

From some of the posts I've read here, it would seem as though the middle and upper class suddenly are struggling more than they ever were, to pay the bills to support Obamacare, the economy has been plunging since the 2007 crash with no end in site, millions upon millions of illegal immigrants are being welcomed into society for the first time in our history, and poor people on welfare are being encouraged to avoid work while enjoying a high quality of life, and in the 2 years left in his term, we will be an Islamic country!!

The truth is, the daily lives for people in all economic classes has not changed under Obama, with the exception of a very small percentage of people who have to choose a new healthcare plan.
The truth is that Hentoff is correct. Obama is doing things that are unprecedented. And he is setting a precedent that is terrible for the country because it is undermining the very notion of separation of powers. You can dismiss it however you want but it is reality. He is a lawless president.
And unfortunately he's acting so with very little scrutiny of the press. Go back to Nixon. The pressure and scrutiny from the press was what exposed and finished his Presidency.

In fairness on this issue of executive abuses, it has to be said that Congress is complicit in the erosion of separate powers, as their lack of challenging the executive branch's overreach is almost non-existent.

Equally concerning for me is Obama's complete illiteracy and concern on matters of economic growth and opportunity creation. He has zero concept of the conditions needed for American capitalism to flourish, while believing that gov't-mandated arrangements will produce success. He couldn't have it more backwards. Coupled with the concerns over executive actions, his Presidency is becoming a failure on every front.

 

____________________
If the Ukrainians didn't know, there ain't no quid pro quo

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 14594
(14594 all sites)
Registered: 3/28/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/23/2014 at 02:36 PM
quote:
quote:
Have cars become better, computers faster and more reliable, TV's bigger, better, and less expensive? They have all been forced to improve because of competition for the consumers money. That hasn't happened in health insurance due to the perverse nature of how the market evolved. They don't respond to the individual customer, because the individual customer isn't paying them in almost all cases.


That analogy doesn't hold any water. Consumer electronics and durable goods are not comparable to health care on pretty much any level. Try again.



You are right, they aren't the same on any level and shouldn't be treated as such. Electronics are luxury items that people don't have to buy or have. Health care is a life or death necessity and shouldn't be treated in the same for profit way that electronics and durable goods. Everyone will have to use the healthcare system multiple times during their lifetime, not out of choice but out of necessity. That is why most civilized and modernized countries have universal healthcare systems to allow their populations to recieve healthcare in a fair way. Not everyone can buy a big screen TV but everyone will need healthcare eventually and it is completely unfair for some to get healthcare with no debt involved just because their workplace offers healthcare plans while others go into debt for life for the same malady because their workplace doesn't offer healthcare. Our system is utterly flawed and skewed. The fact that you would compare electronics and durable goods to healthcare just proves my point. It is a ridiculous comparison.

 

____________________
Pete

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 14594
(14594 all sites)
Registered: 3/28/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/23/2014 at 02:51 PM
quote:
quote:
The law of the land naysayers.

However, I am with the Republicans on this... all you who think health care for all is a bad idea... get sick and die.


You quote the exalted one well. In his manachean universere you either favor this ridiculous unworkable law or you oppose health care for all. No other choice no middle ground. Me good you evil. That's Obama.


IT IS NOT JUST OBAMA!!!!!!!!!! This has been going on for decades and the democrats are always the ones offering solutions and the Republicans constantly shoot them down with NO ALTERNATIVE PLAN!!! They always squash any democrat ideas saying they have a better way but time and time and time again once they have squashed the democrats ideas they brush the topic under the carpet because they have no alternative ideas and they are perfectly happy with the status quo. Obama has said time and again that all ideas would be welcome but we still hear zero, nada, nothing from the GOP as far as alternatives go. If their is a middle ground that will get everyone affordable healthcare insurance then offer up that middle ground. It has never been offered by the GOP over all of the decades while the democrats try over and over and over again to get the American population fairly covered for healthcare like most modern civilized countries do.

So it is not just Obama, me good you evil. It was and is Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Nixon, Clinton, Obama, us good you apathetic.

[Edited on 1/23/2014 by sixty8]

 

____________________
Pete

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16304
(16308 all sites)
Registered: 9/24/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/24/2014 at 12:03 PM
^^^^^^^
Big giant yawn, the fault is with both parties. They are each in bed with corporate America and play the finger pointing game to keep the masses busy arguing instead of paying attention to whats really going on.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/24/2014 at 02:12 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
Wow. The melodrama is off the charts! Dangerous, destructive, illegal, unconstitutional, unamerican, impeachment, lions and tigers and bears, oh my! Give me a break.

What is your agenda? Are you looking to just blow off steam and rant to feel better? Or are you hoping to educate people on why you believe Obama is bad for the country? If you are only looking to blow off steam, then carry on. But if you are hoping to educate and sell your points, then the extreme dramatic words I listed above aren't going to get the job done. Ranting only exposes personal hatred and nothing more.

There's plenty of criticism to go around, but I'm positive you cannot give real life examples of our country being more dangerous and destroyed. I'm also certain you can take out the name "Obama", and plug in any other President's name in history and the context would still apply.

From some of the posts I've read here, it would seem as though the middle and upper class suddenly are struggling more than they ever were, to pay the bills to support Obamacare, the economy has been plunging since the 2007 crash with no end in site, millions upon millions of illegal immigrants are being welcomed into society for the first time in our history, and poor people on welfare are being encouraged to avoid work while enjoying a high quality of life, and in the 2 years left in his term, we will be an Islamic country!!

The truth is, the daily lives for people in all economic classes has not changed under Obama, with the exception of a very small percentage of people who have to choose a new healthcare plan.
The truth is that Hentoff is correct. Obama is doing things that are unprecedented. And he is setting a precedent that is terrible for the country because it is undermining the very notion of separation of powers. You can dismiss it however you want but it is reality. He is a lawless president.
And unfortunately he's acting so with very little scrutiny of the press. Go back to Nixon. The pressure and scrutiny from the press was what exposed and finished his Presidency.

In fairness on this issue of executive abuses, it has to be said that Congress is complicit in the erosion of separate powers, as their lack of challenging the executive branch's overreach is almost non-existent.

Equally concerning for me is Obama's complete illiteracy and concern on matters of economic growth and opportunity creation. He has zero concept of the conditions needed for American capitalism to flourish, while believing that gov't-mandated arrangements will produce success. He couldn't have it more backwards. Coupled with the concerns over executive actions, his Presidency is becoming a failure on every front.


You haven't even mentioned his disastrous foreign policy which has weakned American influence in every area of the world bar none.

 

____________________

 
<<  1    2    3  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com