Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Lawmakers/Aides try to get out of Obamacare


  • Please log in to reply
265 replies to this topic

#31    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 01 May 2013 - 01:33 AM

View Postninjadude, on 01 May 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

Because it's Politico and their unnamed source which may or may not be true. Kind of like a conspiracy theory. Which is most likely what it really is.

No I have never been part of a union but support them strongly. I'm not sure what that has to do with it.
LMAO.  Politico is your boys and this has been verified by many others!! You are a funny guy.  They are backpedaling like crazy and your response is Politico is what, right wing?  Do some research and get back to us on why they are trying to be exempted.  Or just rattle off excuses and embarrass yourself, I win either way .

Were you a union member?

Edited by Merc14, 01 May 2013 - 01:34 AM.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#32    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,838 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:03 AM

View Postninjadude, on 01 May 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

so here you're not even being serious I see
No. I'm serious. What have Democrats done to REALLY, REALLY end poverty and lack of education?

Quote

maybe maybe not. One part of the ACA is to provide healthcare for those who don't have it. So yes minitorities, non-monitorites, just about everyone who cannot get healthcare will have "better" healthcare.  It's kind of a no brainer.
You got me there, but didn't the poor have Healthcare in the form of ERs? So that Obamacare is not providing better healthcare, just paying for it differently?

Quote

do you vote based on what you can get out of government? I see the essential difference for republicans now. They're out to get whatever they can and screw everyone else.
I would if I was starving and living in a ghetto. I pay my taxes and don't dodge what I owe, and I use government programs I am entitled too, but I don't make a lifestyle out of it.

Quote

Meanwhile "minorities" do not vote based on that stupid idea. Which is why they are democrats.
So minorities would rather have no real change, rather then even think about working with Evil Republicans ™ and having greater employment and earning more money?

Out of curiousity, what would you say is the basis of strong minority voting? Loyalty? Pro-union? Affermative Action? Jobs? Tradition?

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#33    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 23,838 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:18 AM

View Postninjadude, on 01 May 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

Because it's Politico and their unnamed source which may or may not be true. Kind of like a conspiracy theory. Which is most likely what it really is.

This is published on Forbes too.
http://www.forbes.co...ares-exchanges/

Washington post has it down another way..
http://www.washingto...from-obamacare/

Quote

That’s where the problem comes in. This was an offhand amendment that was supposed to be rejected. It’s not clear that the federal government has the authority to pay for congressional staffers on the exchanges, the way it pays for them now in the federal benefits program. That could lead to a lot of staffers quitting Congress because they can’t afford to shoulder 100 percent of their premiums. (There’s also a smaller issue related to how retiree benefits might be calculated. But I’m only willing to go so far into the weeds here.)


Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#34    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:27 AM

What has always intrigued me is that if healthcare was such a problem, why not try some "free things" before destroying the world's greatest health care system.

1.  Tort reform. Once we have the single payer system, that ND loves, there will be tort reform anyways.  If Obama has his way you will be treated like a military person and have no status to sue for malpractice.  You can't sue the government.  Wouldn't have cost a dime and would've reduced costs massively and we are going far beyond that anyways so why not try it?.
2.  End state to state restrictions on healthcare plans.  Competition always lowers costs and improves performance.  Obamacare guarantees no competition since every company will leave the general market.  Would've cost nothing.
3.  Serious reforms to medicare.  Billions are wasted on fraud yet the government spends very little to stop it.  Why?  It is estimated we could insure everyone with no insurance if we instituted the above reforms and attacked fraud yet it was never considered .  Why?  It would cost nothing but Lawyer money.

Edited by Merc14, 01 May 2013 - 03:31 AM.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#35    MiskatonicGrad

MiskatonicGrad

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 572 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dunwich USA

  • "the natural progress of things is liberty to yield and goverment to gain ground." Thomas Jefferson

Posted 01 May 2013 - 03:30 AM

View Postninjadude, on 01 May 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:


do you vote based on what you can get out of government? I see the essential difference for republicans now. They're out to get whatever they can and screw everyone else.

Meanwhile "minorities" do not vote based on that stupid idea. Which is why they are democrats.
I'm a republican and I vote in the hopes the goverment will leave me alone. I don't scew anyone but my wife. Meanwhile I remember a whole lot of "minorities" voting democrat because the goverment was going to pay their rent, buy them cars, pay for their phone, and other such nonsense. which since I pay taxes that means these "minorities" are trying to "screw" me. NJ what planet do you hail from?

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread" --Thomas Jefferson(1821)

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session"--Mark Twain(1866)

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson(1800)

#36    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 02 May 2013 - 02:23 AM

I would've been interested in ninjadude's excuses but he has left the stage. Apparently the excuse is now they weren't trying to get exemptions yada, yada.  Term limits folks.  It is time.  I have been ahainst them but it is obvious we need to enact term limits.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#37    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 02 May 2013 - 02:32 AM

View PostDieChecker, on 01 May 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

You got me there, but didn't the poor have Healthcare in the form of ERs?

the ER is NOT healthcare. That is patently false. It's very EXPENSIVE emergency healthcare.

Quote

I would if I was starving and living in a ghetto. I pay my taxes and don't dodge what I owe, and I use government programs I am entitled too, but I don't make a lifestyle out of it.

neither do "minorities"

Quote

So minorities would rather have no real change, rather then even think about working with Evil Republicans ™ and having greater employment and earning more money?

I guess you missed the last two presidential elections. And the last 5 years of Repulicans NOT working with Democrats.

Quote

Out of curiousity, what would you say is the basis of strong minority voting? Loyalty? Pro-union? Affermative Action? Jobs? Tradition?

All of the above and more. Just the same as the "majority".

You're problem here is implying that "minority" equals poor, jobless, government dependent. When in fact the "majority" is all of these things in the majority.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#38    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 02 May 2013 - 02:37 AM

View PostMerc14, on 01 May 2013 - 03:27 AM, said:

before destroying the world's greatest health care system.

because the ACA doesn't destroy the healthcare system. It is not healthcare.

Quote

1.  Tort reform.

I realize you weren't here back when this was debated on UM but I posted many times that it had been studied extensively that any meaningful torte reform would not make any dent whatsoever in the several trillion dollars spent on healthcare.

Quote

2.  End state to state restrictions on healthcare plans

the ACA does this. It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote

3.  Serious reforms to medicare.  Billions are wasted on fraud yet the government spends very little to stop it.

the ACA does this as well. There are numerous items to limit and stop fraud in the law.

It seems like many, once you REALLY understand what's in the law, you're all for it.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#39    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 02 May 2013 - 03:58 AM

View Postninjadude, on 02 May 2013 - 02:37 AM, said:

because the ACA doesn't destroy the healthcare system. It is not healthcare.


Why is congress trying to exempt themselves and their minions from Obamacare?  Answer the bloody question or stop posting as this is the subject of the thread, not your inane pandering to years old propaganda that even Obama has abandoned as pure silliness.  Answer the question.

Answer the question I asked and if you don't i will hound you on THIS thread and this thread only. I have that right as the OP and you are not allowed to hijack a thread, as you are trying to do now.  Address the original question or bow out and we can draw our own conclusions.

Why is congress trying to exempt themselves and their minions from Obamacare?  Answer or start your own thread.

Edited by Merc14, 02 May 2013 - 04:06 AM.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#40    Startraveler

Startraveler

    Fleet Captain

  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Knowledge Brings Fear.

Posted 02 May 2013 - 12:20 PM

View PostMerc14, on 02 May 2013 - 03:58 AM, said:

Why is congress trying to exempt themselves and their minions from Obamacare?

They aren't. The issue isn't whether they're "exempt" from something (what, exactly?). It's what happens to the financial contribution they get to insurance now.

Members of Congress and their staff are explicitly required by the law to give up their current employer-sponsored plans (offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits program)--they're the only people in the entire country explicitly required by the law to give up their plans. Under the law, people who have insurance through work are going to continue to; Congress is the exception. Instead, like people who don't have insurance through their job, they'll have to shop for coverage in the new marketplaces.

But when you're compensated by an employer, even if it's the federal government, your compensation isn't just your wages or salary, it's also your employer's contributions to your benefits. The question the feds seem to be grappling with is what happens to the contribution members of Congress and their staffs currently get put toward their health insurance. Does that disappear, effectively giving all of them a pay cut? Or can they still somehow have it applied to insurance they buy in the new marketplaces?

The point is, members of Congress and their staffs are already treated differently by the law: it treats them more harshly. If they were trying to change that--which, despite Politico's unsubstantiated gossip, they don't seem to be doing--what they would be doing is changing the law to make it treat members of Congress the same way it treats everyone else. Asking what they should be, or want to be, or could be "exempt" from makes no sense.


#41    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 02 May 2013 - 01:42 PM

View PostStartraveler, on 02 May 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

They aren't. The issue isn't whether they're "exempt" from something (what, exactly?). It's what happens to the financial contribution they get to insurance now.

Members of Congress and their staff are explicitly required by the law to give up their current employer-sponsored plans (offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits program)--they're the only people in the entire country explicitly required by the law to give up their plans. Under the law, people who have insurance through work are going to continue to; Congress is the exception. Instead, like people who don't have insurance through their job, they'll have to shop for coverage in the new marketplaces.

But when you're compensated by an employer, even if it's the federal government, your compensation isn't just your wages or salary, it's also your employer's contributions to your benefits. The question the feds seem to be grappling with is what happens to the contribution members of Congress and their staffs currently get put toward their health insurance. Does that disappear, effectively giving all of them a pay cut? Or can they still somehow have it applied to insurance they buy in the new marketplaces?

The point is, members of Congress and their staffs are already treated differently by the law: it treats them more harshly. If they were trying to change that--which, despite Politico's unsubstantiated gossip, they don't seem to be doing--what they would be doing is changing the law to make it treat members of Congress the same way it treats everyone else. Asking what they should be, or want to be, or could be "exempt" from makes no sense.

What you are missing (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since I don't know your agenda) is that millions upon millions of "ordinary" Americans will be losing that employer based compensation as well, in effect taking a pay cut,  because companies will opt to pay the fine rather than what is going to be massive increases in employee health insurance.  Congress knows this and is trying to change the rules for them.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#42    Startraveler

Startraveler

    Fleet Captain

  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Knowledge Brings Fear.

Posted 04 May 2013 - 09:21 PM

View PostMerc14, on 02 May 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

What you are missing (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since I don't know your agenda) is that millions upon millions of "ordinary" Americans will be losing that employer based compensation as well, in effect taking a pay cut,  because companies will opt to pay the fine rather than what is going to be massive increases in employee health insurance.  Congress knows this and is trying to change the rules for them.

I don't know what "massive increases in employee health insurance" are or why they suddenly make it economically feasible and appealing to 1) give employees a pay cut by eliminating health benefits, and 2) pay a $2,000 fine per employee when they could've done the former at any point in the past seven decades and paid no fine whatsoever.


#43    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:28 PM

View PostStartraveler, on 04 May 2013 - 09:21 PM, said:

I don't know what "massive increases in employee health insurance" are or why they suddenly make it economically feasible and appealing to 1) give employees a pay cut by eliminating health benefits, and 2) pay a $2,000 fine per employee when they could've done the former at any point in the past seven decades and paid no fine whatsoever.

Of course you don't because you haven't done any more research than the average brain dead American that voted Obama in.   Do a bit of study and see if you can figure it out and if not then we can debatebut I am not going to waste time arguing with someone who has already made up their mind even though they have no idea what they are talking about.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand

#44    F3SS

F3SS

    FoT

  • Member
  • 9,797 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh

  • Father of Twins
    3-16-16

Posted 04 May 2013 - 10:55 PM

This oughta be good.


#45    Merc14

Merc14

    anti-woo magician

  • Member
  • 9,094 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 05 May 2013 - 12:55 AM

View PostF3SS, on 04 May 2013 - 10:55 PM, said:

This oughta be good.
LOL. It won't be because it isn't going to happen.  "I don't know what obamacare is about but I think its great."   What?????   Oh, you must be a democrat or an idiot. Nevermind, same thing.  The guy is from the UK so why post abut our mess?  Who has time for that? Oy.

Edited by Merc14, 05 May 2013 - 12:55 AM.

Believing when there is no compelling evidence is a mistake.  The idea is to withhold belief until there is compelling evidence and if the universe does not comply with our predispositions, okay, then we have the wrenching obligation to accommodate to the way the universe really is.  - Carl Sagan

"There is no difference between Communism and Socialism, except in the same ultimate end:  Communism proposes to enslave men by force, Socialism-by the vote.  It is merely the difference between murder and suicide."  - Ayn Rand




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users