Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

I Has a Bucket: Preventing bucket theft on Bleeding Hollow | FUBU: A better BH Forum
It is currently Fri Jul 11, 2025 5:42 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:28 am  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

Thought this article was interesting:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/2011/02/dubunking-leading-obamacare-litigation-myths

This will probably be coming up again sometime in the future, possibly sooner than later if the Supreme Court decides it is of great enough importance to grant requests from the relevant parties to skip the usual appeals process.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:13 am  
User avatar

Str8 Actin Dude
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 3:33 pm
Posts: 2988
Location: Frederick, Maryland
Offline

sigh at using words like obamacare apologists and radical overhaul in the first sentence.


Brawlsack

Taking an extended hiatus from gaming
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:19 pm  
User avatar

MegaFaggot 5000
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 11:39 pm
Posts: 4804
Location: Cinci, OH
Offline

Quote:
In recent days, much ink has been spilled and a great deal of hot air expended by ObamaCare apologists seeking to defend the constitutionality of the radical overhaul of Americans’ healthcare delivery system.

Started and stopped here.


RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:20 pm  
User avatar

Old Conservative Faggot
Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 12:19 am
Posts: 4308
Location: Winchester Virginia
Offline

The word "radical" is overused and has taken on a negative connotation, but...since 'Obamacare' is such a big change, I think it applies. I believe this guy is calling these people 'apologists' because they're ignoring what he's pointing out in order to give the impression that there's nothing, legally speaking, wrong with the legislation in light of the court decisions in Florida and Virginia...but again, that's one of those words that, because of its use in association with other subjects, has taken on a negative connotation. This is an opinion piece, so you should expect some bias, I was just more interested in the merits of what he was suggesting than the bile he sauced it with in his article.

Your Pal,
Jubber


AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:45 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

If you're not going to read something because its biased, you might as well be illiterate.


that said, the dude doesn't have to coat it in shit, either.


still, once he gets started he stops spewing bile and it is actually an interesting read.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 12:46 pm  
User avatar

Get Off My Lawn!
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 5:57 pm
Posts: 704
Offline

Jubbergun wrote:
The word "radical" is overused and has taken on a negative connotation, but...since 'Obamacare' is such a big change, I think it applies. I believe this guy is calling these people 'apologists' because they're ignoring what he's pointing out in order to give the impression that there's nothing, legally speaking, wrong with the legislation in light of the court decisions in Florida and Virginia...but again, that's one of those words that, because of its use in association with other subjects, has taken on a negative connotation. This is an opinion piece, so you should expect some bias, I was just more interested in the merits of what he was suggesting than the bile he sauced it with in his article.

Your Pal,
Jubber



Agreed. Of course, his job here was to be as persuasive as possible, and... he's pretty persuasive, imo.

Judge Vinson is quite persuasive, as well. The hammer in his ruling, of course, is that the mandate to individuals to purchase health care is an inseparable cog in the Obamacare machine. I agree with him, but I definitely see room for debate.


Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:07 pm  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

His first point is somewhat misleading (or perhaps just incomplete). Although the 12 judges the White House pointed to may have thrown the case out on procedural rather than constitutional grounds, there have still been 4 federal court judges that have ruled on the merits of the law - 2 thought it was constitutional, 1 thought the individual mandate was unconstitutional but the rest of the law could stand, and 1 thought the individual mandate was unconstitutional and so the entire law had to be rejected. I think this shows why trying to cling to an old and often vague document as the definitive guide to justice isn't terribly productive, since interpretation seems to come down to individual preference in many cases. Presumably this will end up in a split decision in the Supreme Court as well depending on what the individual judges there feel about the case.


Laelia Komi Anomalocaris
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:35 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

Quote:
1 thought the individual mandate was unconstitutional but the rest of the law could stand


this is about where i stand. my insurance is getting to the point where my health is fine enough without it. of course thats when i get hit by a bus.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 1:57 pm  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Usdk wrote:
Quote:
1 thought the individual mandate was unconstitutional but the rest of the law could stand


this is about where i stand. my insurance is getting to the point where my health is fine enough without it. of course thats when i get hit by a bus.


The problem is that when healthy young people like you don't get insurance, it 1) drives up the costs for people who do need it, since you're not in the insurance pool lowering the overall risk, and 2) when you do get hit by a bus (or get sick and then buy insurance, enabled by the new regulations prohibiting discrimination based on preexisting conditions), everyone who has been playing their part and paying for insurance ends up subsidizing your care. This obviously isn't a constitutional argument, but it's the reason the mandate was included.


Laelia Komi Anomalocaris
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:05 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

lol i've been buying insurance all along, the mandate doesn't affect me.


15 bucks to make sure my piping is clean? yes please.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:17 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Obamacare isn't radical by the standards of past and recent changes to the American economic system, by the standards of what other nations are doing and have been doing for decades, by the standard of the magnitude of the problem, and by the standard of common sense.

How is it radical?

I will say I oppose making healthcare mandatory - its an unfair, unfree, and unenforceable law.


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:00 pm  
User avatar

Obtuse Oaf
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:46 pm
Posts: 776
Location: Ontario
Offline

Aestu wrote:
I will say I oppose making healthcare mandatory - its an unfair, unfree, and unenforceable law.


Do you feel this way about all types of universal coverage or just the specific implementation in the PPACA? In Canada coverage is automatic, paid for with taxes (which of course you can't opt out of). Would you see this as a more or less free and fair implementation?


Laelia Komi Anomalocaris
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:21 pm  
Malodorous Moron
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 5:59 pm
Posts: 736
Location: Montreal, QC
Offline

Laelia wrote:
Aestu wrote:
I will say I oppose making healthcare mandatory - its an unfair, unfree, and unenforceable law.


Do you feel this way about all types of universal coverage or just the specific implementation in the PPACA? In Canada coverage is automatic, paid for with taxes (which of course you can't opt out of). Would you see this as a more or less free and fair implementation?


I'm here to endorse that it works very well. I have a friend who's a MD, and he tells me that his favorite thing about it is that he has zero bureaucratic overhead when it comes to offering treatment options to a patient, and money is never involved during that part. If the gov. insurance happens to refuse covering it (very rare he says), then he takes the monetary hit.

Basically it works like this: he treats the patient then bills the government, who pays him and for the treatment.

Before someone bring up taxes, check out the difference in median tax between Canada and the US and get back to me.
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 3:23 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 3:18 pm
Posts: 7047
Offline

american's just don't want MORE taxes. we pay a shit ton as is. the money we are spending on taxes should be better spent by the government.

like cutting the military budget to pay for this shit, for example.


Image
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Obamacare Ruling
PostPosted: Tue Feb 15, 2011 4:14 pm  
User avatar

Querulous Quidnunc
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:19 pm
Posts: 8116
Offline

Laelia wrote:
Aestu wrote:
I will say I oppose making healthcare mandatory - its an unfair, unfree, and unenforceable law.


Do you feel this way about all types of universal coverage or just the specific implementation in the PPACA? In Canada coverage is automatic, paid for with taxes (which of course you can't opt out of). Would you see this as a more or less free and fair implementation?


I completely agree - universal coverage is the way to go. This specific implementation amounts to throwing people to the lions - it's outrageous to insist people have to pay private industry a fee or be breaking the law. It's racketeering.

Now, there's a law that you have to have car insurance to legally drive a car - but to drive a car is a privilege, not the condition of living in the country

To fix the deficit and the economy in general:
I think Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security needs to be restructured. The entitlement program for the unemployed and disabled should be axed. I talk to a lot of poor people, and a lot of them really do feel "I don't have to work because I get a check every month". At the same time, I think there does need to be a safety net, and I think our current system fails in that regard. Bringing back the WPA in some form would be a good start. Perhaps create labor gangs then contract them out to private industry. Of course, there's no political impetus under our current republican system of government, and it is likely that will have to change.

I believe another necessity is running the currency, which will of course lower the standard of living and the government's buying power, but also make it more sustainable and will create more working-class jobs. This will of course make a lot of people, Americans of all economic levels who must learn to do more with less and foreigners who will face steeper competition from us, very angry. But in the long run it is a necessity to get the country back to work. Again, a change in our form of government - or the passage of many decades, or a serious economic catastrophe - will be necessary to make this happen.

The former two changes are most important, but these latter two will also help:

The military must be diminished not only in cost but also in political power. I think the best way to do this is to action black-budgeting (which is the real reason for million-dollar screwdrivers) and implement human resources attrition - stop promoting or recruiting to fill empty positions. Doing so will deprive the military and associated civilian advisories of their numbers and power. Of course this will take many years and the last president to try doing this wound up dead. A violent approach may prove necessary, or the creation of an American praetorian guard / Republican guard / Schutenstaffel - a new military organization responsible only to the CinC with supervisory power over the Pentagon. Re-implementing conscription will also make the military more responsible to the political leadership. Subverting then neutering the military will inevitably prove necessary to bring it back under control - and under cost - because those changes will come only when they accept them.

In the big picture, I think the American polity should be restructured - ideally, New England would become one state, California should be split in two, the South and Central states should be consolidated, and since much of the Midwest is empty land already owned by the federal government, it should be governed as a special administrative region under direct control of the executive, like Roman Egypt or some parts of Russia. This is necessary to ensure the proper management and renewal of natural resources which are currently being liquidated and squandered based on political connections to the legislative branch. Consolidating redundant state governments would save billions and facilitate federal administration. Obviously, these far-reaching changes won't happen under our current government, and it's doubtful they would under any future government. Nor are they truly necessary to correct the deficit (although they would certainly help in the long run).


Aestu of Bleeding Hollow...

Nihilism is a copout.
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 57 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


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 post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMoonclaw" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) (v3.0.8.0) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group