| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1513
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:25 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Feuser...
Great video. The young guy seemed to have a good grip on the health care strategy that was employed by the Gingrich Congress and Bush II.
Question: "But these people need healthcare"? Answer: "Yep". |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1278
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| coboardhead wrote: |
Now, the ADA issue...Hopefully, a "safe harbor" can be written into the law to allow "grandfathering" of existing facilities. The problem is the original law (signed by Bush II) did not provide safe harbors for recreational facilities. It may take legislation...good luck with that! The intention of the ADA legislation was great. Making it enforcement by civil complaints and lawsuits...not so much. |
From http://disabilitylaw.blogspot.com/2012/03/dispelling-myths-about-pool-lifts.html
[...] A couple of points are important to keep in mind here. First, the ADA and the new regs make clear that existing pools have to satisfy the new pool lift standards only if doing so is "readily achievable" -- a term the statute defines as "easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense." In other words, if it is too hard or to expensive to put a lift in an existing pool, the law doesn't require it -- which means that there is no possibility of civil penalties. And the statute explicitly requires courts to take account of the size and financial resources of the business in determining what is readily achievable -- which means that small, family-owned hotels are especially unlikely to have to install new lifts in their existing pools.
Moreover, there is essentially no chance that the Justice Department -- which is the only plaintiff that can recover civil penalties or money damages in an ADA suit against a place of public accommodations -- will bring suits to challenge the failure to install lifts in existing pools in the near future. The primary focus of DOJ's enforcement of new ADA standards has always been education and technical assistance to promote voluntary compliance. It is only when this process has failed that the Department has brought lawsuits against businesses.
[...]
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1513
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Feuser wrote
| Quote: | | ....A couple of points are important to keep in mind here. First, the ADA and the new regs make clear that existing pools have to satisfy the new pool lift standards only if doing so is "readily achievable" -- a term the statute defines as "easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense.... |
I have seen this type of wording fail in the past. While the DOJ will not assess civil penalties, it does not prevent civil lawsuits brought by handicapped individuals that are denied use of the facility. That is why a specific safe harbor would be better than this vague wording. If a small business has to defend a lawsuit using this argument, they have already lost a significant amount of money. Likely, most small businesses will ignore the potential defense of a lawsuit and take a chance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 11471
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I peeked. So sue me, but this is important stuff.
OK, you found a loophole in my challenge, because I presume readers -- including myself -- want to learn something, not play games. I meant any rational, relevant, credible source. Google Obama health care CBO unsustainable for pages of sources on the CBO story.
1. This source, the White House, is neither rational, relevant, nor credible (this generally applies to most administrations, with the current one setting new records in outright proven lies), and that analysis limits itself to "some parts" of the ACA.
2. That sounds credible at face value, but see that source’s bias rating at
http://www.dailyslant.com/the-new-republic-slant . That leaves me doubting its conclusions, even though some of them support my initial claim.
3. That’s Medicare, not Obamacare.
4. Score one (CB0) for my claim, two if you count FBN as as credible business analysis source.
5. You’re citing Bill Mahr as a source? I assume that’s a joke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coyotewindsurf
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 1200
Location: SF Bay
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Directly from the CBO document issued March 13, 2012...
| Quote: | | CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012–2021 period—about $50 billion less than the agencies’ March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period. |
_________________
mo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keycocker
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 2150
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sinceiso is admitting that he can see all our posts listen carefully iso
The swimming pool law is a BUSH initiative and he is your hero.
So was TARP and the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The bank bailout done by Obama turned a profit. O wisely did not spend all tne stimulus money. The car companies did not pay all as yet but tneir odious bailout saved a massive number of jobs at least for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
windoggie
Joined: 22 Feb 2002
Posts: 1886
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Republicans are so witty.
_________________
/w\ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pueno
Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 1637
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| isobars wrote: |
5. You’re citing Bill Mahr as a source? I assume that’s a joke. |
It's about as funny as citing Fox as a credible source.
Oh, wait.
Bill Maher IS a comedian. Fox is neither news nor humor. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 11471
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LHDR wrote: | Here is something scary. If Obama sent the FBI to Fox News headquarters without search warrants and the IRS to Hannity and O'Reilly, or if he a sent a drone to the annual Fox News BBQ. Instead, he doesn't grant interviews to Fox News?
if people can't even agree on the nonsense in this "Pritchett letter"... |
Anyone who thinks that letter is not strongly supportable is not well informed.
Aggressively and repeatedly shunning, attacking by name, and forbidding his communication czar to communicate with the foremost cable TV news network and the foremost cable TV news analyst is government censorship. That scares the crap out of informed Americans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
feuser
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1278
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How are you doing Iso? Getting bored in that dark room, all by yourself?
1. Again, ANY source was the challenge.
2. Ditto
3. One of the key reasons for the Affordable Health Care Act (Republican Speak: Obamacare) was to save Medicare from running out of money.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3532
Medicare’s financing challenges would be significantly greater without the health reform law (the Affordable Care Act, or ACA), which substantially improved the program’s financial outlook.
4. So we are only disallowing left-of-center biased sources now? Okay, I'll let the FOX news hit piece stand. Data is data, albeit cherry-picked and certainly not representative of any big picture. So, therefore let's also allow the paragraph in the CBO report that precedes the contentious $50BN number FOX found:
http://cbo.gov/publication/43080
The Estimated Net Cost of the Insurance Coverage Provisions Is Smaller Than Estimated in March 2011
CBO and JCT now estimate that the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period-about $50 billion less than the agencies' March 2011 estimate for that 10-year period.
5. Yes, Bill Mahr is a comedian.
a. That's why he gets away with more stuff than Hannity and Limbaugh and
b. he's funnier then they are.
That said, I would rate the video higher on the journalistic value scale than for example Breitbarts totally fabricated ACORN-is-consulting-pimps piece. Here, there were questions asked, questions answered. No bullying employees, no impersonating a criminal, period.
cheers, nice to talk to ya.
_________________
florian - ny22
http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Last edited by feuser on Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:44 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
