myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Pipe dream? Obamacare
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 150, 151, 152 ... 198, 199, 200  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
techno900



Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 1442

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler, you read too much into my posts and are pretty casual about making assumptions about what others think. On the other hand, I try to respond to exactly what others post and debated those statements, and not bring personalities into the discussions.

I have clarified my believes many times regarding SS and Medicare and their societal benefits, but you seem to ignore that. You try to paint all conservatives with the same brush when there are actually many similarities in what you and I believe. You said:
Quote:
You're just one of those self centered people that want to pick and choose what they want in society and readily disregard everything they don't.
Careful, you are falling into the same pit as Mac, pueno and BajaDean. Wild, inaccurate accusations will not contribute to winning an argument.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3230

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Techno makes an excellent point here.
i have seen that his views are not that different from the libs here.
I find the same with libs I speak with in Maui and here.
They all oppose borrowing ,dont like high taxes, big government, welfare for slackers,and so on.
Americans have moved to the center.
The seeming pârtisan divide seems to be in opinions assigned by the media to these groups.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pueno



Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2584

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

techno900 wrote:
Careful, you are falling into the same pit as Mac, pueno and BajaDean. Wild, inaccurate accusations will not contribute to winning an argument.

OK.... I'll read your posts more carefully, looking for that little silver lining hiding under the big cloud.
.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5694

PostPosted: Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry techno900, I call it as I see it. You offer a lot of commentary that is laced with the negativity we regularly see from the right. Seemingly, you're a bit uncomfortable with the fact that I point it out. You might think that you're putting enough distance in what you say to avoid some of the responsibility for it, but I'm not fooled at all. I have to admit though, you're not as bold and ugly in your disdain as some of those on your side of the fence. Nevertheless, I'm listening to what you say, and how you present it. There is very little balance in how you see and interpret what's going on in the political arena around us. As poorly as the Republicans have conducted themselves in recent years, you are never really critical of them, and you seem quite eager to accept what they say and do without reservation. Without question, you're all in on the Republican team. Although it could be said that I'm all in on the Democratic team, I do offer enough criticism of them to show my conservative side on some of the issues.

If you don't like being labeled, you might want to show more of your independence and balance in the fray around us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nw30



Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 1555
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obama Repeals ObamaCare

Under pressure from Senate Democrats, the President partly suspends the individual mandate.

Dec. 20, 2013 6:41 p.m. ET

It seems Nancy Pelosi was wrong when she said "we have to pass" ObamaCare to "find out what's in it." No one may ever know because the White House keeps treating the Affordable Care Act's text as a mere suggestion subject to day-to-day revision. Its latest political retrofit is the most brazen: President Obama is partly suspending the individual mandate.

The White House argued at the Supreme Court that the insurance-purchase mandate was not only constitutional but essential to the law's success, while refusing Republican demands to delay or repeal it. But late on Thursday, with only four days to go before the December enrollment deadline, the Health and Human Services Department decreed that millions of Americans are suddenly exempt.

Individuals whose health plans were canceled will now automatically qualify for a "hardship exemption" from the mandate. If they can't or don't sign up for a new plan, they don't have to pay the tax. They can also get a special category of ObamaCare insurance designed for people under age 30.

So merry Christmas. If ObamaCare's benefit and income redistribution requirements made your old, cheaper, better health plan illegal, you now have the option of going without coverage without the government taking your money as punishment. You can also claim the tautological consolation of an ObamaCare hardship exemption due to ObamaCare itself.

These exemptions were supposed to go only to the truly destitute such as the homeless, bankrupts or victims of domestic violence. But this week a group of six endangered Senate Democrats importuned HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to "clarify" that the victims of ObamaCare also qualify. An excerpt from their Wednesday letter, whose signatories include New Hampshire's Jeanne Shaheen and Virginia's Mark Warner, is nearby.

HHS and the Senators must have coordinated in advance because literally overnight HHS rushed out a bulletin noting that exemptions are available to those who "experienced financial or domestic circumstances, including an unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or she had a significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses that prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan." A tornado destroys the neighborhood or ObamaCare blows up the individual insurance market, what's the difference?


These exemptions were supposed to go only to the truly destitute such as the homeless, bankrupts or victims of domestic violence. But this week a group of six endangered Senate Democrats importuned HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to "clarify" that the victims of ObamaCare also qualify. An excerpt from their Wednesday letter, whose signatories include New Hampshire's Jeanne Shaheen and Virginia's Mark Warner, is nearby.

HHS and the Senators must have coordinated in advance because literally overnight HHS rushed out a bulletin noting that exemptions are available to those who "experienced financial or domestic circumstances, including an unexpected natural or human-caused event, such that he or she had a significant, unexpected increase in essential expenses that prevented him or her from obtaining coverage under a qualified health plan." A tornado destroys the neighborhood or ObamaCare blows up the individual insurance market, what's the difference?

The HHS ruling is that ObamaCare is precisely such a "significant, unexpected increase." In other words, it is an admission that rate shock is real and the mandates drive up costs well into hardship territory. HHS is agreeing with the Senators that exemptions should cover "an individual whose 2013 plan was canceled and considers their new premium unaffordable." In her reply letter, Mrs. Sebelius also observes that some people "are having difficulty finding an acceptable replacement." She means the new plans are overpriced.

The under-30 ObamaCare category that is being opened to everyone is called "catastrophic" coverage. These plans are still more expensive than those sold on the former market but they're about 20% cheaper on average than normal exchange plans because fewer mandates apply and they're priced for a healthier, younger risk pool. Liberal Democrats hated making even this concession when they wrote the law, so people who pick catastrophic plans don't get subsidies.

What an incredible political turnabout. Mr. Obama and HHS used to insist that the new plans are better and less expensive after subsidies than the old "substandard" insurance. Now they're conceding that at least some people should be free to choose less costly plans if they prefer—or no plan—and ObamaCare's all-you-can-eat benefits rules aren't necessary for quality health coverage after all.

But the White House is shredding ObamaCare's economics on its own terms. Premiums for catastrophic products are based on the assumption that enrollees would be under 30. A 55-year-old will now get a steep discount on care courtesy of the insurer's balance sheet, while other risk-tiers on the exchanges will have even fewer customers to make the actuarial math work.

Pulling the thread of the individual mandate also means that the whole scheme could unravel. Waiving ObamaCare rules for some citizens and continuing to squeeze the individual economic liberties of others by forcing them to buy what the White House now concedes is an unaffordable product is untenable. Mr. Obama is inviting a blanket hardship amnesty for everyone, which is what Republicans should demand.

The new political risk that the rules are liable to change at any moment will also be cycled into 2015 premiums. Expect another price spike late next summer. With ObamaCare looking like a loss-making book of business, a public declaration of penance by the insurance industry for helping to sell ObamaCare is long overdue.

The only political explanation for relaxing enforcement of the individual mandate—even at the risk of destabilizing ObamaCare in the long term—is that the White House is panicked that the whole entitlement is endangered. The insurance terminations and rollout fiasco could leave more people uninsured in 2014 than in 2013. ObamaCare's unpopularity with the public could cost Democrats the Senate in 2014, and a GOP Congress in 2015 could compel the White House to reopen the law and make major changes.

Republicans ought to prepare for that eventuality with insurance reforms beyond the "repeal" slogan, but they can also take some vindication in Thursday's reversal. Mr. Obama's actions are as damning about ObamaCare as anything Senator Ted Cruz has said, and they implicitly confirm that the law is quarter-baked and harmful. Mr. Obama is doing through executive fiat what Republicans shut down the government to get him to do.

The President declared at his Friday press conference that the exemptions "don't go to the core of the law," but in fact they belong to his larger pattern of suspending the law on his own administrative whim. Earlier this month he ordered insurers to backdate policies to compensate for the federal exchange meltdown, and before that HHS declared that it would not enforce for a year the mandates responsible for policy cancellations. Mr. Obama's team has also by fiat abandoned the small-business exchanges, delayed the employer mandate and scaled back income verification.

"The basic structure of that law is working, despite all the problems," Mr. Obama added. His make-it-up-as-he-goes improvisation will continue, because the law is failing.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579270252042143502
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have fun in Hawaii BHO, but stay away from the north shore, the surf is really up this time of year.

_________________
I don't drink the 'cool' aid, I drink tequila, it's more honest.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5694

PostPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pretzel logic from the right continuing to blame President Obama. Am I surprised? Given the source for all the whining, not at all. Frankly, it's stuff like this that going to be the run-on dialog from the right leading up to the 2014 elections. Even though the individual market as a whole represents a small minority of the health insurance marketplace, and the numbers in this latest exception affects what would be an arguably a minute fraction of that minority marketplace, let's make it a big deal of it and blow everything out of proportion. Let's not waste a single opportunity to heap blame on President Obama.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beaglebuddy



Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 669

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 2:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The individual market is largely made up of self employed people.
I'll remind you that the self employed are largely conservatives in part because when you are self employed you have to write a check for taxes every quarter as opposed to those who have it taken out before they get their paycheck so they never see it and never miss it.
Hence the war on the self employed.
Liberals want everyone working for large corporations so the can be unionized and controlled, not to mention all that money liberal politicians can access from union dues.
Don't expect anything from the left when you are self employed, they've already written you off and are actively trying to crush you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3230

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Self employed people are conservatives?
Liberals want everyone to work for corporations?

Did you know that libs have been in a war against corps for many years?
It is clearly a segment of the economy they detest.

I am in a union and my brothers are very conservative.
The most liberal stste is hawaii. It full of small businesses of every description.
There are two box stores and a thousand small stores in MAUI;

Have you ever asked a lib about this?
Or did you work it out without actually ever asking one single lib their opinion?
I am a conservative who asks libs what they think.
Try it at Xmas. You will get a big surprise
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4987

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you can't make it, fake it. Beagle boy, coming from a profound misunderstanding of the world, invents:


Quote:
Liberals want everyone working for large corporations so the can be unionized and controlled, not to mention all that money liberal politicians can access from union dues.


just to disagree with it. You might actually try asking a question now and then to see what people think.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5694

PostPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

beaglebuddy,

I have been a liberal my whole adult life, but that doesn't mean that you can box me up and label folks like me as you see fit. I've made this point a number of times on this forum, but it bears repeating. I have never worked for a union, and I would have never work a union job because I did't want anyone to tell me what to do. That said, I'm not against unions, or those that work for them. Unions have been an important factor in building a vibrant middle class in America, and I seriously doubt that could have happened without their growth and influence. You might go back and study our history and learn more about what they've accomplished and why.

Regarding union money in politics, or for that matter, corporate money in politics, I have been adamant in my opinion here that the US Supreme Court made an incredibly bad decision in the the Citizens United case. Even President Obama, in front of the nation in one of his State of the Union addresses, voiced his opposition to that terrible decision. Our nation would be far better off with strict laws regulating campaign contributions both reducing the influence of money and making things far more transparent.

Your idea of income tax payments and the concept of some sort of invented war on the self-employed is ludicrous. Where did you pick up such nonsense? In the end, everyone pays their income taxes based on their yearly adjusted gross income. While I can't say exactly why folks that are self-employed make their payments quarterly, I would imagine that it's because their income isn't always the same like those folks working for an identified wage or salary. I could have elected to pay my tax contributions quarterly, but I elected to do it monthly because it's simpler for me to arrange it that way. I think if the truth were told, the government requires tax contributions quarterly as a minimum to maintain cash flow for its financial responsibilities. I'm sure that it's possible for you to make your total tax contribution entirely up front in January if you wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 150, 151, 152 ... 198, 199, 200  Next
Page 151 of 200

 
Jump to:  
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

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group