patrick.net

While we're engaging in hearsay and poisoning the well, can anyone tell me why all my conservative friends fuck their own sisters?

Anyone else notice the Dow closed at a record high today less than 48hrs after all the hysteria of the worldwide markets being in free fall

oh man lol

America Great Again

Dan8267 says

federal protections

the concept of local control UNLESS it subverts the constitution (ROE vs Wade) would act as a protection in your example.

turtledove says

The media decided that Trump was going to round up immigrants and refuse them entry into this country (though I don't know how they twisted his words into that). Nevertheless, we don't believe that to be what he meant. We believe he meant illegal immigrants. Now, if he were to start rounding up immigrants of all kinds, I assure you, most of us are not in support of that.

What? Who thought he meant all immigrants? You're all immigrants in one way or another. It was obvious he was talking about illegal immigrants - the media didn't misrepresent that.

turtledove says

The media decided that Trump's concern over refugees from terror-prone countries means that he's going to ban Muslims. We believe he wants to strengthen the vetting process. But, I promise, if he starts banning religions in this country, most of us won't be in support of that. Even those of us who aren't religious because we recognize that each person has the right to choose and exercise his/her beliefs as long as those beliefs aren't contrary to our laws.

Now that is funny. For a good chunk of his more fervent supporters that was one of his more popular plans as evidenced by the rabid anti-Muslim comments posted on here.

turtledove says

The media decided that Trump's locker room talk means that he's going to pussy grab women as they walk by. If he starts doing that, we wouldn't support it. Right after we stop laughing in incredulity, we'd fight right alongside you to stop gratuitous pussy grabbing.

For the President of the United States, his comments were pathetic. You can brush them off any way you like, but it's disappointing that you find it so easy to do so. For me his little 'impersonation' of the disabled journalist was one of the more despicable things he did as my mother recently died from the crippling disability she had to suffer for half her life, and for someone in his position to think such a playground act was appropriate speaks volumes for the type of individual you and his supporters just elected.

turtledove says

Repealing Obamacare. Well yes, we support that one. But most of us recognize that he cannot just jerk the rug out from under it. ACA took years to implement, just hitting the "delete" button would cause tremendous pain. So we agree that ACA was a bad bill... But we recognize that he must have something to replace it with and a well thought out transition plan for achieving that. If he jerks the rug out suddenly from ACA, most of us would not support that and would fight with you for something better.

I rather think you'll be in for a shock in that case, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

turtledove says

Cancelling trade agreements. We think we got shafted. Like Obamacare, he cannot just throw the agreements in the shredder and call it a day without causing a tremendous backlash in our economy. Most of us recognize that it would be better to re-negotiate the trade agreements... and that it will take time unless we want to shock the system (hardly ever turns out well). Should he just shred the agreements and launch our economy into some serious turmoil, many of us would be pretty pissed off right there with you.

Most of you? Really? Based on what? Shredding those agreements seemed to be central to his appeal. You can see it from all the pie in the sky anti-globalist (whatever they think that means) comments you see littering the internet.

Quigley is deplorable says

Rashomon says

And if the shoe had been on the other foot...

We have a Constitution and it shouldn't be changed for any except the most compelling and urgent reasons, certainly not because some special snowflakes feel butt hurt.

I didn't say it should be. It was Donald and his followers throwing out the anti-constitutional comments pre-election, or have you so quickly forgotten the little quips he kept making?

So what's the answer Rashomon? What would make you happy? Absolute proof of future events? A time machine, perhaps? I'll work on that for you.

Rather than attempting to find common ground... you respond with meaningless, almost ridiculing one-liners... Okay fine. You're perfect and everyone else is an idiot. Feel better? If there's anything further I can do for you, please do not hesitate to ask.

turtledove says

Rather than attempting to find common ground... you respond with meaningless, almost ridiculing one-liners... Okay fine. You're perfect and everyone else is an idiot. Feel better? If there's anything further I can do for you, please do not hesitate to ask.

No, I pointed out how I felt what you said was wrong. How is that meaningless one liners? What do you expect me to say about healthcare? Nobody knows what they want to replace it with, but their ideas in the past haven't exactly been that positive and we all know they're desperate to repeal Obamacare. What else?

turtledove says

So what's the answer Rashomon? What would make you happy? Absolute proof of future events? A time machine, perhaps? I'll work on that for you.

Eh? I simply pointed out why I disagreed with what you said. And what do you mean 'What's my answer?' He won the election. He and the Republican party will make the decisions. I think they will be poor for your country and more particularly for those white working class people who looked to him for answers to their problems, but we'll have to wait and see. More specifically, I wait with interest to see what happens when someone pricks the obvious thin skin of your new President. Do they intend to still keep him away from Twitter? Anyway the answer is obvious, make voting a legal requirement.

Nobody knows what they want to replace it with
=========

But, we kind of do. We want the regional barriers taken down to increase the number of insurers. We want to keep the pre-existing part because most of us agree that the practice of refusing coverage based on a prior history of diaper rash was taking the whole pre-existing condition thing to an extreme that was never intended. We want HSA so we can keep the tax benefit, but also keep the money if we don't have to dip into it. As it sits now, it's just consumed by higher premium prices, which we can never get back whether we are high consumer or low consumer of healthcare.

I cannot speak for the whole country... But ACA has reduced the number of insurers here in CA. When is that ever good for prices? Yes, let's let Anthem have the entire CA market. I'm sure they'll do the right thing and price their products fairly! Or better yet, Kaiser. ACA did that. It did that in a lot of places. But living in CA, we have to take what's offered in CA. And we're required by law to pay whatever they tell us. Like a tax. Can you imagine tax rates going up 20% in a single year? Since it's forced, it might as well be a tax. One that we don't get to vote on.... ever. One whose rates are controlled by corporations who can never be voted out of office.

I cannot speak for the whole country

--------------

You sure speak for we quite often. How many of you are there?

People want a million different things for healthcare. Do you think people started out wanting the ACA? That's what they could get through. You'll have a million and one interest groups pushing their particular agenda, so it's pretty obvious that what you'll end up with is extremely unclear, though it seems highly likely that the number of people covered will fall. Your healthcare system needs a root and branch fix. It isn't going to get it.

turtledove says

Can you imagine tax rates going up 20% in a single year?

The penalty for NOT buying the insurance went up more than 200% for next year.

So Yep, ACA is indeed a tax... it's the loophole treating it as such that allowed it to pass constitutional muster.

You sure speak for we quite often. How many of you are there?
===================

We isn't everyone. Obviously, I'm talking about like-minded individuals. If you're in a different we, that's okay, too.

That's what they could get through

---------------

This is a lie

Ppaca is what the democrats decided to give us, and for good reason. Follow the money

Obama was for single payer, before he was against it. Those lobbyists know, everyone has their price.

errc says

This is a lie

Ppaca is what the democrats decided to give us, and for good reason. Follow the money

Obama was for single payer, before he was against it. Those lobbyists know, everyone has their price.

Er, and why did they decide to give you that? Single payer wouldn't have gone through, so they went with some other (compromised) proposal, naturally juggling all the interested parties - that's the system you've created in your country.

Thunderlips Licks Shill Tears says

turtledove says

Can you imagine tax rates going up 20% in a single year?

The penalty for NOT buying the insurance went up more than 200% for next year.

So Yep, ACA is indeed a tax... it's the loophole treating it as such that allowed it to pass constitutional muster.

A tax you are required to pay to private "insurance " companies

What are they insuring, anyways?

Just FYI: Trump won Ohio by more people (~450,000) than Hillary won over Trump in the Entire Country (~350,000).

Just to give you an idea of how slim her national "popular vote win" is.

errc says

What are they insuring, anyways?

Well, they're ensuring they get well paid in many cases.

Rashomon says

errc says

This is a lie

Ppaca is what the democrats decided to give us, and for good reason. Follow the money

Obama was for single payer, before he was against it. Those lobbyists know, everyone has their price.

Er, and why did they decide to give you that? Single payer wouldn't have gone through, so they went with some other (compromised) proposal.

I'm assuming because it was the most profitable course of action.

I cannot think of any other reason

The penalty for NOT buying the insurance went up more than 200% for next year.

So Yep, ACA is indeed a tax... it's the loophole treating it as such that allowed it to pass constitutional muster.
======================

Seriously, the most fucked up thing ever. And some say it's an accomplishment because we forced everyone to participate. I pay $13k/year (family of four) in premiums. Let's see... what did we consume this year? Kids' well checks... Flu shots... The kids are twelve, so they got some boosters. That's it. All for the bargain price of $13k! But that's not all, folks! Since there's still a deductible... I also paid for the services. So really, I paid $13k for pretty much the hell of it. Well not really. I get to say I'm compliant with the law. Maybe someday, the whole family will need heart, lung, liver transplants and we'll get our money's worth. The new American Dream!

If Health is Wealth, you couldn't assure a people be any poorer than they are with Heritage Foundation Care (Obamacare).

errc says

If Health is Wealth, you couldn't assure a people be any poorer than they are with Heritage Foundation Care (Obamacare).

I think there were plenty of people 'poorer' off with what they had (didn't have) before the ACA.

Rashomon says

errc says

If Health is Wealth, you couldn't assure a people be any poorer than they are with Heritage Foundation Care (Obamacare).

I think there were plenty of people 'poorer' off with what they had (didn't have) before the ACA.

How do you figure?

How does having insurance make one less poor?

turtledove says

Seriously, the most fucked up thing ever. And some say it's an accomplishment because we forced everyone to participate. I pay $13k/year (family of four) in premiums. Let's see... what did we consume this year? Kids' well checks... Flu shots... The kids are twelve, so they got some boosters. That's it. All for the bargain price of $13k! But that's not all, folks! Since there's still a deductible... I also paid for the services. So really, I paid $13k for pretty much the hell of it. Well not really. I get to say I'm compliant with the law. Maybe someday, the whole family will need heart, lung, liver transplants and we'll get our money's worth. The new American Dream!

The cost and what you get for that is the issue, not what you consume in any given year. You pay too much in the US and you get a healthcare system that still doesn't serve the whole population even with the ACA. Is any new system going to lower the coverage levels back to what they used to be? That to me should be the major focus of attention. Having so many people with limited access to good healthcare is simply shocking.

errc says

How do you figure?

How does having insurance make one less poor?

You had something like 50m uninsured people before the ACA, did you not? Not having access to a good healthcare system makes you 'poorer' off.

smaulgld says

the concept of local control UNLESS it subverts the constitution (ROE vs Wade) would act as a protection in your example.

Doesn't work for the Second Amendment. There should be no federal laws regarding arms according to that. Yet our government uses the grotesque guise of the interstate commerce provision to regulate weapons big time. And this is an obvious deliberate misinterpretation of the provision that is beyond ridiculous.

Prior to ACA, my sister didn't have health insurance

After the ACA, she still doesn't have health insurance. However, she now pays a fine when she files her income taxes.

She is paying a fine/tax penalty, for being young and healthy, and smart enough a freedom loving capitalist, to not purchase private health insurance.

this is exactly why Republicans now hold all branches of government. Because democrats are either stupid or incompetent

This is the problem with too much power having transferred over decades from the states to the federal government: THERE IS NO ONE SIZE FITS ALL. We're trying to please everyone, and it's not working. The beauty of the USA model (as it was originally intended) was to leave the bulk of the power to state and local governments. The federal government is supposed to have limited power and set the general framework (Constitution) within which the states must operate...that's it, except for anything with interstate implications. No Department of Education for example. No national healthcare system. No national welfare system.

If we let the states and municipalities have more power, we let them operate closer to the citizens electing their officials and making laws. Then, there's more diversity of ideas and greater competition. If Texas fails and California succeeds, people will move if Texas doesn't shape up. Let diversity and competition drive excellence and weed out the loser ideas.

Sent from 30,000ft, so sorry for bad grammar/typos.

Rashomon says

errc says

How do you figure?

How does having insurance make one less poor?

You had something like 50m uninsured people before the ACA, did you not? Not having access to a good healthcare system makes you 'poorer' off.

You are conflating health insurance with healthcare.

Are you saying that having insurance is leading to people having better access to better health (care)?

Because the opposite seems to be true

The cost and what you get for that is the issue, not what you consume in any given year. You pay too much in the US and you get a healthcare system that still doesn't serve the whole population even with the ACA. Is any new system going to lower the coverage levels back to what they used to be? That to me should be the major focus of attention. Having so many people with limited access to good healthcare is simply shocking.
==================

And that's what ACA missed. Health insurance isn't healthcare... nor is it a guarantee of access to healthcare. People get turned away from doctors all the time: "I'm sorry, but we aren't in network with your insurance plan. Have a nice day."

You beat me to it errc.

errc says

Because the opposite seems to be true

What, $8000 bronze plan family deductibles for $1000/month isn't good healthcare? :)

errc says

You are conflating health insurance with healthcare.

Are you saying that having insurance is leading to people having better access to better health (care)?

Because the opposite seems to be true

I'm saying that you had a system where 50m people had their access to good (prevention-based) healthcare severely limited because they weren't covered by health insurance. That makes them 'poorer.' And quite obviously people with healthcare insurance have better access to healthcare than those who don't even if you can't necessarily go to your first choice medical practitioner.

As anyone educated knows, having a straight democracy leads easily to a tyranny of the majority, whereby the wishes and desires of the minority are disregarded and subsumed in the voting prowess of the majority. On issues this is fine, but as a referendum on a minority Group it's a quick step to fascism. So keeping Constitutional limits on straight democracy is important for The preservation of minority rights.

Rashomon says

errc says

You are conflating health insurance with healthcare.

Are you saying that having insurance is leading to people having better access to better health (care)?

Because the opposite seems to be true

I'm saying that you had a system where 50m people had their access to good (prevention-based) healthcare severely limited because they weren't covered by health insurance. That makes them 'poorer.' And quite obviously people with healthcare insurance have better access to healthcare than those who don't even if you can't necessarily go to your first choice.

Prove it. Why do you expect me to just take your word for it?

You claim to not even be a citizen, it's quite obvious that you know not that of which you speak. But please, prove me wrong. I would love that

Prove you're right.

errc says

Prove it. Why do you expect me to just take your word for it?

You claim to not even be a citizen, it's quite obvious that you know not that of which you speak. But please, prove me wrong. I would love that

Prove what? That the uninsured have worse health care than the insured? Seriously? And I'm not claiming I'm not a citizen. I'm not. I am, however, a Green Card holder and have health care insurance in the US.

Rashomon says

Prove what? That the uninsured have worse health care than the insured? Seriously? And I'm not claiming I'm not a citizen. I'm not. I am, however, a Green Card holder and have health care insurance in the US.

Welcome to America.

Prove what? That the uninsured have worse health care than the insured? Seriously?

----------------

Yea. Seriously.

errc says

Yea. Seriously.

Let me get this clear, you think the uninsured have equally good healthcare as those who are insured. That is what you are claiming and that is what you want me to disprove? Good grief. Spoken like a true Bernie supporter.

http://kff.org/report-section/the-uninsured-a-primer-2013-4-how-does-lack-of-insurance-affect-access-to-health-care/