User Tag List

First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 175

  1. #61
    Member Valis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    The bottom line for me is that the issue was already voted on, and the issue was already reviewed by the highest legal court, and now a faction of Republicans is attempting to revoke something already ratified by simply refusing to fund it by threatening to layoff over a million government workers and really souse the economy. There is no reason to be dragging it back into yet ANOTHER session; it was a done deal months/years back.

    I don't think even Boehner wants to shut things down, but he's kind of in a corner.



    Thank you for your persuasive argument, I don't think I've heard a more articulate explanation.

    There's barely any time for anyone at this point to avoid it, even if they'd choose not to at the last minute. Here at work, we're battening down the hatches and locking everything down for our time away.

    But it would be nice if you were right.
    Sorry I was being a little flippant, I realise that this is serious and affects government workers.

    I wasn't so much arguing as predicting. I was very surprised that they couldn't come to a reasonable compromise.

    If you've seen my posts you'll know I'm in favour of a small government. This isn't the right way to do it. Ultimately, people will die unecessarily if some of the services aren't funded. The correct way to do it is set out policies, win the election, then shut it down.

  2. #62
    Member Valis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheStarchDefenders View Post
    just gotta say...
    Not a very good prediction was it?

  3. #63
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Udog View Post
    I live in the Hampton Roads area, which has a high percentage of military, government workers, and government contractors. It's been a rough year for us. First, the furloughs caused a significant portion of the population to lose 8 (give or take) days of work over the course of a couple of months. And now, all of those people are simply out of work indefinitely. Plus, because it's the beginning of a fiscal year, paperwork for various contracts may or may not be properly signed, etc., leaving many contractors without work until things get sorted out by the people that may be furloughed.
    While the rest of the country has suffered the number of USA top 6 richest counties in the DC metropolitan area has increased from 2 to 4 over the last decade. Even though not all federal workers are making 6 figures plus it's still pretty hard for me to give a shit when the private sector has been in the tank for over five years.

    It's not a coincidence that the Republican representatives in the area, Forbes and Rigell, are now breaking with the Republican line and trying to push for a continuing resolution to reopen the government. (http://rigell.house.gov/news/documen...umentID=351981, Forbes I heard about on an NPR report on the way to work.)

    The attitude that I see in this overwhelmingly Republican area (most of the Democrats are in Northern Virginia) is that they hate the Affordable Healthcare Act, but don't find the issue worth losing their income over and want the Republicans to let it go. It's primarily those that hate the AHA *and* aren't having their livelihoods affected by this political gamesmanship that are more prone to have the attitude of stopping this thing through whatever means necessary.
    This is exactly why I'm more inclined to support the Republicans digging in their heels rather than just waiting for it to fail. Once enough people are on the take it doesn't matter how harmful, inefficient, or unsustainable the program is. It's not going away. Just look at ss and medicare. Which means the only solution is to create more entitlements. Which iswhy this is just a oneway path to a federal single payer system.


    Don't forget about the massive amounts of disinformation pushed by the Tea Party and lobbyists, such as the death panels that target grandma. The Republicans did everything they could to make the bill as lousy as possible, which in fairness, succeeded because the Democratic Party is pretty dysfunctional too so they had to make crippling concessions to pass the thing.
    I haven't heard this argument before. Can you please cite the amendments the republicans made that make the law worst and destined to fail?




    Quote Originally Posted by Comeback Girl View Post
    As an outsider, I wonder:
    - Why doesn't Obama just say something like 'I'm the president, the American people voted for me to rule this place, so if you fuckers don't want this fucking bill, I'll just pass it myself!' I mean, the people voted for Obama's plans, so just fucking give them what they voted for!
    - Why isn't there a law that prevents a government shutdown? As an outsider, I must say it doesn't make sense to me and it comes across as really childish. Change the goddamn law! It's ridiculous.
    Do you live in a dictatorship?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Lol. What a bunch of liberal talking point bullshit with zero actual analysis.

    The worst part was when she started talking about local control.
    Lolololololol
    Before Obamacare if you wanted something like Obamacare in your state you could have it, like Mass. did. Now you and your state don't have a choice.

    Here's some real analysis about the history of the individual mandate:

    Republican support for the individual mandate

    As far as I have been able to find, Stuart’s 1989 brief is the first published proposal of an individual mandate in the context of private-sector-managed health systems. In 1991, Mark Pauly and others developed a proposal for George H.W. Bush that also included an individual mandate. While others credit Stanford economist Alain Enthoven with the idea, Enthoven’s earliest published reference to an individual mandate was an indirect one in the 1992 Jackson Hole paper.

    In 1992 and 1993, some Republicans in Congress, seeking an alternative to Hillarycare, used these ideas as a foundation for their own health-reform proposals. One such bill, the Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act of 1993, or HEART, was introduced in the Senate by John Chafee (R., R.I.) and co-sponsored by 19 other Senate Republicans, including Christopher Bond, Bob Dole, Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Richard Lugar, Alan Simpson, and Arlen Specter. Given that there were 43 Republicans in the Senate of the 103rd Congress, these 20 comprised nearly half of the Republican Senate Caucus at that time. The HEART Act proposed health insurance vouchers for low-income individuals, along with an individual mandate.

    Newt Gingrich, who was House Minority Leader in 1993, was also in favor of an individual mandate in those days. Gingrich continued to support a federal individual mandate as recently as May of last year.

    It would seem that 1990s conservatives weren’t concerned with the constitutional implications of allowing Congress to force people to buy a private product. “I don’t remember that being raised at all,” Mark Pauly told Ezra Klein last year. “The way it was viewed by the Congressional Budget Office in 1994 was, effectively, as a tax…So I’ve been surprised by that argument.”

    Stuart Butler’s USA Today op-ed

    Last October, prompted by a Wall Street Journal piece by James Taranto, I recounted how the Heritage Foundation was once the leading conservative advocate of the individual mandate. In response to various articles of this stripe, Stuart has published an op-ed in USA Today, in which he describes as a “myth” the idea that Heritage invented the mandate. “I headed Heritage’s health work for 30 years,” he writes. “And make no mistake: Heritage and I actively oppose the individual mandate, including in an amicus brief filed in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.” He notes that his proposal struck a contrast with Hillarycare, and that Milton Friedman also called for an individual mandate:

    The confusion arises from the fact that 20 years ago, I held the view that as a technical matter, some form of requirement to purchase insurance was needed in a near-universal insurance market to avoid massive instability through “adverse selection” (insurers avoiding bad risks and healthy people declining coverage). At that time, President Clinton was proposing a universal health care plan, and Heritage and I devised a viable alternative.

    My view was shared at the time by many conservative experts, including American Enterprise Institute (AEI) scholars, as well as most non-conservative analysts. Even libertarian-conservative icon Milton Friedman, in a 1991 Wall Street Journal article, advocated replacing Medicare and Medicaid “with a requirement that every U.S. family unit have a major medical insurance policy.”

    My idea was hardly new. Heritage did not invent the individual mandate.

    Stuart says that Heritage’s version of the individual mandate contained “three critical features” that distinguish it from Obamacare’s mandate: (1) it required people to buy catastrophic coverage, rather than more expensive comprehensive coverage; (2) it was primarily financed “through the carrot of a generous health credit or voucher…rather than by a stick”; (3) Heritage’s mandate “was actually the loss of certain tax breaks…not a legal requirement.”

    In fairness to Heritage’s critics, it’s worth pointing out that: (1) Heritage proposed the individual mandate in 1989, well before Bill and Hillary Clinton were on anyone’s political radar screen; (2) Obamacare and Romneycare both finance individual insurance purchases through generous vouchers (via the exchanges); (3) Obamacare’s mandate is “enforced,” weakly, by withholding tax refunds.

    Why has Heritage changed its mind?

    Stuart goes on to give four reasons why he and Heritage no longer support the mandate: (1) a mandate isn’t necessary because “the new field of behavioral economics taught me that default auto-enrollment in employer or nonemployer insurance plans can lead many people to buy coverage without a requirement;” (2) “advances in ‘risk-adjustment’ tools are improving the stability of voluntary insurance,” as illustrated by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program; (3) Obamacare’s mandate forces people to buy comprehensive coverage rather than catastrophic coverage; (4) Obamacare’s mandate is unconstitutional.


    Stuart, of course, is perfectly entitled to change his mind, and the reasons he gives for having done so are ones I’d agree with. (I would also point out, as I do repeatedly in this space, that the “free rider” problem is grossly exaggerated, and that an individual mandate actually increases free-riding.)
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...idual-mandate/
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  4. #64
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,813

    Default



    DANA BASH: You all talked about children with cancer unable to go to clinical trials. The House is presumably going to pass a bill that funds at least the NIH. Given what you’ve said, will you at least pass that? And if not, aren’t you playing the same political games that Republicans are?

    HARRY REID: Listen, Sen. Durbin explained that very well, and he did it here, did it on the floor earlier, as did Sen. Schumer. What right did they have to pick and choose what part of government is going to be funded? It’s obvious what’s going on here. You talk about reckless and irresponsible. Wow. What this is all about is Obamacare. They are obsessed. I don’t know what other word I can use. They’re obsessed with this Obamacare. It’s working now and it will continue to work and people will love it more than they do now by far. So they have no right to pick and choose.

    BASH: But if you can help one child who has cancer, why wouldn’t you do it?

    REID: Why would we want to do that? I have 1,100 people at Nellis Air Force base that are sitting home. They have a few problems of their own. This is — to have someone of your intelligence to suggest such a thing maybe means you’re irresponsible and reckless –

    BASH: I’m just asking a question.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  5. #65
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,813

    Default

    Double post
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  6. #66
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,685

    Default

    My thoughts are with you poor Americans, I hope the tea party dictators burn in hell.

  7. #67
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post

    As best as I can tell, you are affirming that everything worked as the system does, except that a certain group (hint: the Republicans) have perhaps disregarded a gentleman's agreement in pressing a shutdown.
    The gentleman's agreement I was referring to was the tradition of not passing legislation on the scale of Obamacare without substantial bipartisan support, thereby limiting the possibility of shutdown scenarios within our system of checks and balances. It was the Democrats who broke that gentleman's agreement by (barely) passing Obamacare through a temporary supermajority without any Republican support, despite knowing that such legislation requires strong bipartisan acceptance for implementation.

  8. #68
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Point and counter point with John Boehner and John Boehner.

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    The gentleman's agreement I was referring to was the tradition of not passing legislation on the scale of Obamacare without substantial bipartisan support, thereby limiting the possibility of shutdown scenarios within our system of checks and balances. It was the Democrats who broke that gentleman's agreement by (barely) passing Obamacare through a temporary supermajority without any Republican support, despite knowing that such legislation requires strong bipartisan acceptance for implementation.
    Ah. That's a much fuzzier agreement. How big of a bill is too big and how much bipartisan support is enough? Sounds to me like the line could be redrawn where one pleases.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  9. #69
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Ah. That's a much fuzzier agreement. How big of a bill is too big and how much bipartisan support is enough? Sounds to me like the line could be redrawn where one pleases.
    These types of subjective lines tend to be articulated very strongly when they are made relevant, which you can hardly blame Republicans of not doing. In any event, the scale of the Obamacare legislation is far more than any other legislation passed along partisan lines in decades, so far as I am aware.

  10. #70
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lowtech redneck View Post
    These types of subjective lines tend to be articulated very strongly when they are made relevant, which you can hardly blame Republicans of not doing. In any event, the scale of the Obamacare legislation is far more than any other legislation passed along partisan lines in decades, so far as I am aware.
    Even you can't come up with a length of time longer than decades? That hardly sounds unprecedented then.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

Similar Threads

  1. Possible Shutdown of Government in United States - Effects on Troops
    By Vie in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 181
    Last Post: 04-22-2011, 04:44 PM
  2. Czech Government Criticized for Surgical Castration of Sex Offenders
    By iwakar in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 04-21-2009, 11:31 AM
  3. Government involvement in economy
    By Mycroft in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-07-2009, 11:17 AM
  4. Is the government out to get me?
    By Kiddo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 10-30-2007, 03:32 PM
  5. PUTIN DISSOLVES RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
    By Oberon in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 09-15-2007, 05:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO