[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

Like your knee jerks about the IRS, your knee jerks when you read right wing media about Obamacare.

I, on the other hand, and willing to let things play out. Obamacare hasn't been implemented yet.. AFTER it is, if it's the disaster you say, we'll ALL know it.

excon

Nice yet unrealistic try, but the LA Times is not owned by the Kochs yet and no one can (rationally) accuse NBC or Politico of being "right wing media." For a guy who used to be so skeptical about government you sure have become a true believer.

[smearcase]

"I, on the other hand, and willing to let things play out. Obamacare hasn't been implemented yet.. AFTER it is, if it's the disaster you say, we'll ALL know it. "

Sounds like the Bush/Cheney plan for the Iraq war, ex.

[speechlesstx]

Here's another way it's playing out so far...

Hundreds in government had advance word of Medicare action at heart of trading-spike probe

Is anyone minding the store? Anyone, anyone?

[talaniman]

They probably got furloughed.

[excon]

Hello tal:

They probably got furloughed.

Hee, hee.

Excon

[speechlesstx]

So inside info, i.e. an illegal, unfair advantage in the market, for HHS workers is a joke to you?

[speechlesstx]

Oh the irony...

Obamacare? We were just leaving …

Dozens of lawmakers and aides are so afraid that their health insurance premiums will skyrocket next year thanks to Obamacare that they are thinking about retiring early or just quitting.

The fear: Government-subsidized premiums will disappear at the end of the year under a provision in the health care law that nudges aides and lawmakers onto the government health care exchanges, which could make their benefits exorbitantly expensive.

Democratic and Republican leaders are taking the issue seriously, but first they need more specifics from the Office of Personnel Management on how the new rule should take effect — a decision that Capitol Hill sources expect by fall, at the latest. The administration has clammed up in advance of a ruling, sources on both sides of the aisle said.

If the issue isn’t resolved, and massive numbers of lawmakers and aides bolt, many on Capitol Hill fear it could lead to a brain drain just as Congress tackles a slew of weighty issues — like fights over the Tax Code and immigration reform.

The problem is far more acute in the House, where lawmakers and aides are generally younger and less wealthy. Sources said several aides have already given lawmakers notice that they’ll be leaving over concerns about Obamacare. Republican and Democratic lawmakers said the chatter about retiring now, to remain on the current health care plan, is constant.

(Also on POLITICO: Poll finds low Obamacare support)

Rep. John Larson, a Connecticut Democrat in leadership when the law passed, said he thinks the problem will be resolved.

“If not, I think we should begin an immediate amicus brief to say, ‘Listen this is simply not fair to these employees,’” Larson told POLITICO. “They are federal employees.”

Republicans, never a fan of Democratic health care reform, are more vocal about the potential adverse effects of the provision.

“It’s a reality,” said Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas). “This is the law. … It’s going to hinder our ability with retention of members, it’s going to hinder our ability for members to take care of their families.” He said his fellow lawmakers are having “quiet conversations” about the threat.

Read more: Obamacare? We were just leaving

I guess that's one plus for Obamacare, maybe it'll send of those old entrenched coots home.

[tomder55]

Knowing that the Dems would be slaughtered in the 2014 elections if the implementation of the employer mandate went in effect this fall as planned , the emperor has decreed that employers will not have to comply until After the 2014 election.

Republican former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin called the move “deviously brilliant,” by removing a potential electoral impediment from in front of congressional Democrats before the midterms.

“Democrats no longer face the immediate specter of running against the fallout from a heavy regulatory imposition on employers across the land,” Holtz-Eakin wrote. “Explaining away the mandate was going to be a big political lift; having the White House airbrush it from the landscape is way better.”

Obama Administration Delays Health Care Law Employer Penalty Until 2015 | TIME.com

[paraclete]

Interesting system you have where legislation can be altered by decree

[tomder55]

That's because we have an emperor... but I'm guessing that somewhere in the 2000 pages of cr@p sandwich that is the Obamacare law,there is a provisions that gives the executive broad powers of interpretation and implementation. Not to worry ,without reading the law Congress passed it ,the emperor signed it ,and SCOTUS said it was cool to redefine a penalty as just another tax.

[paraclete]

But it is a tax the star chamber said so it is a tax on everyone who doesn't have insurance. Here we are more open about this, if you don't have insurance the ATO our equivalent of the IRS will collect a levy from you as part of your tax bill. It doesn't matter whether you have insurance, or not, you will still get care but don't need an operation any time soon because the queue forms on the right for anything but life threatening

[excon]

Hello again,

Look! It's Obamacare...

[tomder55]

But it is a tax the star chamber said so it is a tax on everyone who doesn't have insurance. Here we are more open about this, if you don't have insurance the ATO our equivalent of the IRS will collect a levy from you as part of your tax bill. It doesn't matter whether you have insurance, or not, you will still get care but don't need an operation any time soon because the queue forms on the right for anything but life threatening

Here is the deal.. the personal mandate has not been extended . But the Dems have come under pressure from business to extend the mandate that applies to businesses . The Dems are concerned about campaign contributions drying up from business... thus the extension.

[paraclete]

Here is the deal .. the personal mandate has not been extended . But the Dems have come under pressure from business to extend the mandate that applies to businesses . The Dems are concerned about campaign contributions drying up from business ... thus the extention.

If I hear you correctly partisanship has been demonstrated in an extradinary way. The democrats are buying the support of their political opposition or maybe not. Extraordinarily even handed but undemocratic, if you will pardon thye pun

[tomder55]

The democrats are buying the support of their political opposition

That would assume that the Dems aren't eyeball deep in the cronyism .That of course would be a false assumption despite their rhetoric.

[tomder55]

The horrible effects of Obamacare are being demonstrated in the June jobs report. 195,000 payroll jobs were added , while the unemployment rate stayed at 7.6% .This is being touted as a good report.
But if you look at it a little closer the real story emerges. First ;if we continue to increase jobs at a rate of 200,000 or less then the unemployment rate will remain at or near 7.6% .

What is really scary about the report is that almost ALL of the jobs created were part time work. The full time work force actually shrunk. So far this year the number of part time jobs has climbed by 557,000.By contrast, the number of full time U.S. workers fell by 240,000 in June.
College graduates continue to get hammered . 45% of recent graduates have jobs that do not require college degrees... and those are the lucky ones who have jobs. The unemployment rate for 18- 29-year olds is 16.1%... and it would be higher if the 1.7 million who have dropped out of the labor force entirely were counted .

So what happened ? Didn't stimulus work ? Didn't the Feds QE efforts do the job ? No!. and to add salt to the wound ,Obamacare ;specifically the employer mandate that requires businesses with 50 or more full time employees to offer health insurance to employees ,or pay a $2,000 penalty per worker,encourages the creation of part time work over the creation of full time . The law also defines a full time job as 30 hours a week.

Tuesday the Obots announced they were postponing this employer mandate until after the 2014 midterm elections in the hope that will encourage more full time hiring; and prevent the Dems from taking a political hit for this disastrous law. But thousands of businesses, especially in retail and fast food, have already started to cap employment for many workers at 30 hours.They know this reprieve is for only one year. So if the Obots really want to change this dynamic ,they would introduce legislation to repeal the employer mandate.

[paraclete]

Hey Tom I hear a whole lot of whinging here, we have seen figures like this for a long time it's the new millennium and in the new millennium employment isn't going to be the way it was, you need to get used to it because this is the damage which your wonderful job creator 1% did to the economy when they exported the jobs to China and India, to Mexico and who knows where. This is the result of all the free trade B/S you have swallowed and we are there right along with you except we are maybe twenty years ahead on the other side of reconstruction. The stimulus only stopped you from sinking further. You have to face the fact that you have an education industry that is training people for jobs that may never be there, that is last century's dream. Suddenly someone realised that the cash cow is dry. Structurally you have a lot of work to do and it entails change, it is a an aweful scary word because you cannot define the world of the future

[speechlesstx]

So when did the president get to unilaterally decide which laws or parts thereof to implement?

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

the horrible effects of Obamacare are being demonstrated in the June jobs report.

Nahhh... It's sequestration.. You remember that piece of garbage you forced down our throats...

Excon

[excon]

Hello again, Steve:

So when did the president get to unilaterally decide which laws or parts thereof to implement?

If you believe a cop on the street has the authority to let a speeder go, then the TOP COP in the land can do the same thing.

Excon