I've read Aesop's Fables, and you apparently can't distinguish between a bored kid trying to amuse himself and reporting the facts. See tom's last post for one.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
|
I've read Aesop's Fables, and you apparently can't distinguish between a bored kid trying to amuse himself and reporting the facts. See tom's last post for one.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
You so totally missed the moral of the story.
Doesn't matter what you believe or not... fact is you are manipulated to believe Socialism works. Reality is... its failed everywhere. And Socialized medicine is no different... if sucks everywhere compaired to a system you can get anything you want as long as you pay for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Because controlling costs by restricting needed services through rationing... always screws the people who need it the most.
Ok, enjoy your system... as reported by the American Pravda (right-wing blogs).
You so totally missed the point.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Keep reporting possible train wrecks ad nauseum, I'm sure the odd one will turn out to be true. Don't be surprised if people start to tune you out though.
Like those "war on women" people or the sequester doomsday the wolf-crier-in-chief was preaching. Now there's some wolf crying for you, but you'd never try and hold them accountable would you?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Yep.Quote:
Like those "war on women" people
I've been happy with it for over 52 years... I got anything I needed when I needed it... without ever once having to get on a waiting list. Including two surgeries.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Same here. No paperwork either.
Really... explain the waiting lists for rationing of certain procedures... like Hip replacements etc north of the border. One of the reasons Canadians are coming here and paying cash to have done... instead of having done in Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
You hear of the exceptions and think it is the norm.
Your insurance companies ration and deny as a business model, it's no better.
Really... don't know of ANYONE whose insurance rations care... the worse ones might dictate where you go to get it... but not when... unless of course you are talking Organ transplants where everyone who needs one gets on the list..Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
My wife's got a bunch of Relatives in Montreal... (aunts, uncles.. cousins and their spouses).
Well there are certainly a lot of questions in AMHD's Health and Wellness forums from Americans; barely any canucks in there asking questions... I guess they just go to their family doctor. :-)Quote:
don't know of ANYONE whose insurance rations care
Most of them don't have electricity... live in Yurts and have no internet...Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
Most of them work at Walmart and McDonald's.
Actually he was trying to be funny to respond to my previous comment about how there aren't many canadians seeking medical help on this board.Quote:
Most of them work at Walmart and McDonald's.
Some people need to try to belittle others.
Nahhh it's the Obots themselves who admit they are in over their heads on this foolishly destructive law .
President Obama's Promises Of Smarter Government Don't Pan Out - Investors.comQuote:
The president brags about how he's bringing smart, 21st century technology to government. But the news surrounding that talk provides a showcase for how inept his administration is when it comes to IT.
'We've made huge swaths of your government more efficient and more transparent, and more accountable than ever before," President Obama claimed Monday.
But the very next day, AP reported that a "computer system problem" has caused his administration to delay yet another piece of ObamaCare for at least a year.
The delay stems from a conflict between the law's premium penalties for smokers and its restrictions on insurance rates. While ObamaCare forbids insurance companies from adjusting rates based on health status, it does let insurers impose a significant premium penalty on smokers.
At the same time, the law forbids insurance companies from charging older people more than three times what they charge younger people. The problem is that the premiums for an older smoker can end up more than three times that of a young smoker once you include the penalties.
Late last month, Obama's tech-savvy regulators quietly told insurance companies that they simply couldn't figure out how to get their computers to square the two.
"The system currently cannot process a premium for a 65-year-old smoker that is more than three times the premium of a 21-year-old smoker," it explained.
And a fix could take at least a year.
Meanwhile, the administration tacitly admitted last week that its promise of real-time verification of a consumer's eligibility to buy subsidized coverage at an ObamaCare exchange wasn't exactly panning out.
Under ObamaCare, only those who don't have access to "affordable" insurance at work can buy coverage in an exchange, and only those below certain income levels are eligible for tax subsidies.
Rather than a high-tech instant check, the administration told states they could simply take the applicants' word for it when it comes to their employer-provided coverage, as well as their "projected annual household income," without the need for "further verification."
The reason Obama's regulators gave: There's still "a large amount of systems development on both the federal and state side, which cannot occur in time for Oct. 1, 2013."
The Government Accountability Office had warned in June that the administration was behind schedule getting the ObamaCare data hub up and running.
The administration also admitted earlier this year that — even with a nearly four-year lead time — it would have to put off a key piece of the small-business exchanges that was supposed to let employees at small firms pick from a range of plans best suited to their needs. "Operational challenges" was the excuse given for this delay.
To be fair, states aren't doing much better when it comes to "smarter" government. The Washington Post reported last week that Connecticut will delay almost a third of the functions they'd planned for its insurance exchange Web portal. Oregon, Nevada and other states are also cutting back on their ObamaCare websites.
But the stakes are much higher at the federal level, particularly when protecting personal data is involved. Here, too, Obama's "smart" government falls short.
Public.Resource.org revealed this week that the IRS inadvertently exposed the Social Security numbers of as many as 100,000 taxpayers on a government website. The group described the IRS' data security efforts as "unprofessional and amateur."
These are the same sort of government bureaucrats, mind you, who'll be in charge of securing vast amounts of the far more sensitive data ObamaCare will collect on millions of Americans once it goes into effect.
You know the answer is simple, stop all this loading for smokers and age etc and just make one premium for everyone, the young will eventually get the benefits they are paying for and the smokers will die out anyway
First they have to kill the insurance companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I want to get back to the unconstitutional decision by the emperor to "suspend " implementation of the employer mandate . The President has no such authority under the constitution.
Article II Sec 3 is clear that the President shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed. It gives him certain disgression on how to execute the laws ;but NONE to unilaterally decide to delay implementation if implementation is outlined in the law. Kings have the power to over rule Parliments in some phony systems . English kings used to pull that stunt now and again until the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Then the Brits did this thing called a Bill of Rights . The 1st thing it addressed was the powers of the executive (monarch)... "the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal."
Fast forward to Nixon. He tried this gambit of not spending money Congress had allocate. The courts shot it down. Then in 1998 Congress decided that they would grant the President the power to line-item veto. But SCOTUS knocked that down (Clinton v City of New York) . Writing for the majority ,Justice John Paul Stevens wrote : "There is no provision in the Constitution that authorizes the president to enact, to amend, or to repeal statutes."
So where does the emperor get the cahones ?
This isn't the 1st time he pulled this stunt . He unilaterally decided to suspend deportations after the Dream Act was defeated (he called it prosecutorial discretion). He recrafted NCLB in his own image (he said he had the authority based on allowable waivers of requirements in the statute that did not exist) .
Edit... whether you agree with the move or not... (I think the employer mandate ;like the rest of the law ,should be repealed ). It is not his place to make that call.
That's just too simple for a righty to understand and an insurance company who wants MO MONEY, not steady money will never go along with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
I guess you would like to pay higher rates for insurance even though you eat right.. take care of yourself and exercise... so the drunk, chain smoking 300 lb... meth head down the street can get lower rates on his?
If everyone pays the same rate, then when they raise yours, they raise his too. Your assumption that they give him a discount and not you I preposterous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
YOU will be paying more... to subsidize his bad behaviour...
You do know how risk management works... Banks use it to determine credit worthiness... Insurance companies use it so responsible people don't have to pay for the irresponsible people.
Businesses use it when the hire people... and roll out products every day... the world revolves around about putting value on the safe choices and putting a cost on the unsafe choices.
Sen Ted Cruz' dad had some words on that...Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
The speech:Quote:
I grew up in Cuba under a strong military, oppressive dictatorship. So as a teenager I found myself involved in a revolution. I remember during that time a young charismatic leader rose up talking about hope and change. His name was Fidel Castro. And, you know, we all followed him. We all we thought he was going to be our liberator. As a result of being involved in the revolution, I was imprisoned, I was tortured, but by the grace of God I was able to leave Cuba on a student visa and came to the greatest country on the face of the earth.
...
I think the most ominous words I've ever heard was in the last two State of the Union addresses when our president said, "If Congress does not act, I will act unilaterally." Not much different than that that old bearded friend that I left behind in Cuba, governing by degree, by executive order, just like a dictator like Fidel Castro.
If Obama makes those calls isn't it legal for him to do so? If it were not then he would be summoned wouldn't he?
That guy's "speech" seems to be low on facts and high on echo-chamber cheering.
That guy has earned the right to say whatever the hell he wants.
And no, Obama does not have the right to act unilaterally on whatever the hell he wants.Quote:
So as a teenager I found myself involved in a revolution. I remember during that time a young charismatic leader rose up talking about hope and change. His name was Fidel Castro. And, you know, we all followed him. We all we thought he was going to be our liberator. As a result of being involved in the revolution, I was imprisoned, I was tortured, but by the grace of God I was able to leave Cuba on a student visa and came to the greatest country on the face of the earth.
There must be checks and balances for that if it isn't legal. Why aren't the WH conservatives doing anything about it?Quote:
Obama does not have the right to act unilaterally on whatever the hell he wants
Bush lied, people died, when does the WH do anything about the wrongs. We sit back and get wronged constantly. It's the only consistent thing about gov. They are working into each others hands 1 plot =2 systems striving toward 1 outcome.
BS... Bush had the same intelligence briefings everyone in congress got and agreed with...
He didn't write them.. he only got them first... its obvious the people that pushed that story know little about how things work in the government. Yet they pretend otherwise.
Now However... Benghazi... Lies WERE drafted by the White house... and pushed on the American people and the world.
Someone with "standing " (see the SCOTUS decision on the Cal Prop 8 case) needs to challenge the emperor in court . It's a sure thing that the Holder Justice Dept won't stop him. The most likely people with standing would be the Congressional Dems.. Well they isn't going to challenge their master either . The House Repubics could conceivably challenge him with an impeachment charge . But even if they got that past the House ,the Senate would never convict . So we are left with little options regarding the unconstitutional acts of this
Imperator .
Wow, he's so awful yet Clinton gets a hearing for a blowjob. Methinks you rightys are blowing smoke.
My point is that is the way it is DEM OR REP. The system is 1 but an illusion of 2 party to get the Americans arguing over what they are going to do regardless of which party is IN office at any given time..Quote:
Originally Posted by smoothy
Thanks for clarifying that... seemed like the intent was different than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
After hearing that line about 153,000,000 times... one tends to automatically think... oh crap not this again.
Kind of like this:
I think that Clintoon deserved impeachment.. they went after him for perjury and suborning perjury... which are serious crimes in the real world.. not for bjs .Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
But they should've gone after him for selling military secrets to the Chinese for campaign contributions.
Yet another union has lost its love for Obamcare...
They didn't really buy that promise thing did they?Quote:
The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) released a white paper on Thursday warning that Obamacare, as the law is commonly known, “threatens to harm our members by dismantling multiemployer health plans.”
The union also took out a full-page ad in Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call calling on the president to “keep your promise” by ensuring that, in the president’s words, “if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” …
According to the union’s white paper, “the current multiemployer plan system provides affordable, high-quality health care coverage to millions of American workers, retirees, and families.”
New fees in the law, regulations on minimum-benefit requirements, and “the lack of multiemployer-specific administrative guidance” are threatening those insurance plans, IBEW claims.
“Because it does not recognize the unique nature of multiemployer plans, the Affordable Care Act contains provisions that could undermine this American success story and reduce the number of working families covered and lower the quality of their care,” the Roll Call ad warns.
Kalifornia is jumping to be the poster child for Obamacare and spending millions to promote it, using kids to sell it to their parents. Should be smooth sailing...
But they'll have to wear name badges. What could go wrong?Quote:
Fraud fear raised in California's health exchange - The Reporter
SACRAMENTO (AP) -- As California prepares to launch its health care exchange, consumer groups are worried the uninsured could fall RI victim to fraud, identity theft or other crimes at the hands of some of the very people who are supposed to help them enroll.
The exchange, known as Covered California, recently adopted rules for a network of more than 21,000 enrollment counselors who will provide consumers with in-person assistance as part of the federal Affordable Care Act. In some cases, they will have access to personal and financial information, from ID cards to medical histories.
But the state insurance commissioner and anti-fraud groups say the exchange is falling short in ensuring that the people hired as counselors are adequately screened and monitored.
Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones also said the exchange does not have a plan for investigating any complaints that might arise once the counselors start work. That means consumers who might fall prey to bogus health care products, identity theft and other abuses will have a hard time seeking justice if unscrupulous counselors get hold of their Social Security number, bank accounts, health records or other private information, he said."We can have a real disaster on our hands," Jones, a Democrat, said in an interview.
...
"Once they're in that position of trust, it's possible they will obtain information that will allow them to build the trust they have with the individual they're working with and potentially sell them all manner of bogus products, steal their identity, gain access to certain assets they might have," Jones said. "The list is virtually endless."
Hello again, Steve:
What's wrong with using the public to smooth the way for a big change in the law?? Nothing, that's what...
But, if you want to see something WRONG, it's YOUR side for threatening the NFL for agreeing to smooth the way...
Look, if you don't like the law, try to repeal it for the 45th time, and good luck with that. It's the law of the land... Get over it.
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:06 AM. |