“So, you're saying it's the insurance companies fault that they provided a product that fit the segment of the market place (evidenced by people buying the policy) and that they should have known what was going to happen in the future when the ACA passed? Whatever happened to Obama's statement that if you liked your existing coverage you could keep it. Were the insurance companies at fault for believing what was coming out of the President's mouth? I agree it's not all Obama's fault. There was the rest of the Democratic Party that rammed the unread and unconsidered legislation through at fault also.”
Rodrockler on Dec 9, 2013 at 18:18:17
“Obama had no control over insurance companies creating substandard policies.
He fell on his sword for them!
I think not! It is called legislative process and it followed all the legislative procedures as EVERY OTHER LAW previous!
It went through the House of Representatives and passed.
Then is passed through the Senate
It was signed into law by the president.
It was upheld by the supreme court.
Stop with your ridiculous notions.
Learn how government works or stop posting until then because all you do is feed the hysteria!
NONE have contested any law previous to this one and it is the primary law this man was elected to accomplish. A majority favored it. You must be among the minority.
I for one am glad it passed and that I DON'T have to pay for uninsured people anymore on MY premium!
Why is it that this one president receives so much more backlash over doing his job then ANY other before him?!?!?
Quick, make up an excuse before you admit it!”
M0XIEMADIS0N on Dec 9, 2013 at 14:48:10
“Any policy they wrote after 2009 that did not include the ACA requirements (10 must have's on every policy) they knew would have to be cancelled. People buying the policies does not make them good policies...the majority of people that have filed bankruptcy due to medical bills are people who had insurance - yep, they paid for coverage and the greedy insurance companies denied and/or cancelled them when they were sick. The insurance companies agree to discontinue writing the policies, but decided to continue until the last minute...easy profits! Greed knows no bounds.”
kevamy on Dec 9, 2013 at 09:38:12
“No he's saying that the insurance companies are in the business of making profits and not protecting the american people. And THEY made the decision to drop these policies BECAUSE the new ACA will not allow them to rip off the consumers anymore. PAY ATTENTION AND STOP POINTING THE FINGER OF BLAME AT THE DEMOCRATS AND PUT IT WHERE IT BELONGS DIRECTLY IN THE FACE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.”
Why don't you re-read the first paragraph of my post? If both your income and bills, increase by 50%, what does anyone gain? Other than the government, who will most likely waste it (like they've done with everything else). There would be no increase in anyone's standard of living, and decreases in anyone living on a fixed income (retirees).
An increase in the minimum wage to $15 would only benefit the recipients until hyper inflation brought the living expenses back into line. What would be your feeling if you were working in a job for the last 5 years and were making $15 an hour. The law changes and the slacker out of high school, with no saleable skills came in at the same pay rate you were making. Would you demand an increase? Imagine that across the board. Hyper inflation takes place and no one benefits. Imagining that the country could double the minimum wage and not have any negative effect on the economy doesn't make any sense at all.”
Dec 6, 2013 at 22:16:26
“Hello? Did you even read my post? I don't care how you want to build a "city", because the nearest thing we have to a "city" that could justify public transportaiton is almost 100 miles away. And if everyone moves there, who's going to grow the food you eat, or support those who do?”
“So, let's do an experiment. Everyone can add another zero to their paycheck this month. Of course, every bill they have to pay has to have another zero added on to it (because those people want the zero added to their check also). So, who benefits, other than the government, as they work on a percentage and tax tables?
Lets face it. If a non-management/franchisee "career" fast food worker really wanted to be able to support themselves/family etc., they would have either paid attention in school, kept in their own country, avoided drugs/premarital sex, and all the other stupid decisions people make. I don't see why if they made their choice, why I have to pay for it. Of course, there hasn't been any cultural sense of responsibility for one's actions in this country for the past 40 years.”
gogochocobo on Dec 7, 2013 at 03:10:44
“I see your rather unpleasantly classist remark and implore you to consider a couple of things.
1. The $15.00 per hour wage everyone is freaking out about is before taxes- after taxes the average worker in, say, NY is going to make about $12.96 an hour. Assuming that the average worker is working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year that means a yearly income of $26,956.80. Assuming you agree with the federal government's math, that means a family of four would be living about $3,000 above the poverty line. Fast-food workers might make enough money to buy a car, send their children to college, or actually be able to put enough money together to get a college degree and acquire a "real job".
2. These workers getting paid more may also mean that your federal and state government will be getting more in taxes with more money going into schools, roads, and other public services- including (in theory) more money towards federal programs like the Pell Grant. So indirectly, those "not real" workers you so disdain getting a raise could potentially improve your quality of life. Particularly when you consider that a large number of fast food workers are paid so little that they eke out a living well underneath the poverty line- meaning that they require government assistance to survive. Being paid a living wage means that more of your taxes will be able to go towards other things- like schools, hospitals, roads.”
Dec 2, 2013 at 22:02:26
“That's great if everything is close enough to be able to do that. I work in a rural area, and put between 35 and 80 miles per day just in employment related commute. Temps range from a low of 20 degrees (Farenheite) to 120. Try that on a bicycle!”
Frederik Blom on Dec 4, 2013 at 03:49:37
“I completely understand. But if you really wanted to, you could start building your cities so they were more efficient and didn't require so much car travel. It's only a long way from home to your job, because you build it that way :-) ”
“I just spent the last 2 hours reading what I could find on the internet (including the White House website and the "non-partisan" website, of course sponsored by the DNC) and other than a lot of hot air and promises to strengthen "small business and the middle class", there are not any actual facts listed.
The "help to the middle class" in training, early childhood education, etc. is mainly geared towards the "disadvantaged". How that is supposed to help the middle class, I don't know. We are usually the ones that, so far, have had to pay through the nose. The one thing that is not stated, is how these programs are going to be administered or paid for, other than vague statements of making the "rich" pay their "fair share". Most states are broke or going there, no money for further unfunded mandates. I guess Obama and the Democratic Party will just go ahead and request further extensions of the debt ceiling, further putting us as a nation further in debt, weakening our economy and ruining our children's hope for prosperity. The ACA, if it was that important, why wasn't it rolled out in a controlled manner so all the parts and pieces worked? My concern is that if the implementation has been so ill-thought out, what does that say for the assumptions and thinking behind the entire plan? And no, I'm not a Republican T/P member. Just a conservative leaning independent.”
Beatriz09 on Nov 28, 2013 at 09:50:36
“Another absolutely CRUCIAL part of Obamacare is that hardworking middle class Americans no longer have to keep a job they don't want, only not to lose their health insurance. From now on, you can change jobs WITHOUT losing your insurance. That's a HUGH difference for the middle class (and for businesses, by the way, as from now on they'll be able to hire the most competent and motivated person). Allowing children on their parents' plan until they're 26 ALSO helps the middle class a lot. And ALL independent studies that analyzed the entire law have shown that overall, it CUTS the deficit by more than a trillion. That means LESS taxes for the middle class in the future ...”
Beatriz09 on Nov 28, 2013 at 09:50:19
“Obamacare has actually been implemented since 2010, almost every 6 months new parts are kicking in. Most of them went perfect. SOME of them, however, cannot be implemented at the moment that was initially planned because of ever changing conditions on the ground, as is NORMAL with al big, multi-year projects (private or public sector).
To know whether the law is doing what independent studies said it would do or not, you have to look at what each part does, once it's fully implemented.
The part that was supposed to be implemented today, when it comes to small businesses, consist of setting up marketplaces in every state, inviting private insurers to offer plans on those exchanges (knowing that small businesses shopping on the exchanges will be able to compare plans, which increases competition among insurers, and as a consequences, reduces premiums and increases quality), and getting the system ready that allows them to get (big) tax credits. The EASIEST way to shop, for consumers on the exchanges, is through a website, that allows them to immediately compare plans. THAT website (and the website alone) will only be ready next year. In the meanwhile, all the other things of THIS part of Obamacare are kicking in at the initially planned moment. WITH the website, premiums will probably go down even MORE, as that's the easiest way to compare plans. Just as they will go down during the next years because more and more people will be shopping on the exchanges. And that's not only independent studies saying it, it's ALSO what ALREADY happened years ago in MA, where Obamacare is ALREADY implemented (AND also had some delays with websites ... by the way), remember? So it's not like this is a totally new experiment, it's merely a copy of what has ALREADY been proven to work. Reason why Romney defended it on a federal level during the entire 2009 HCR debate (in op-eds, on MTP etc.).
As to your question about the middle class: one of the biggest problems with the previous HC system was that you could easily pay premiums all your life, insurance companies would nevertheless drop you once you got seriously ill, or even refuse to insure you once you got a pre-existing condition. A LOT of middle class people lost their home, went bankrupt, or had to call their kid back from college, ONLY to be able to pay for care they VITALLY needed.
The current system GUARANTEES you that IF you become sick, you'll get the care you need.
MadLottieDottie on Nov 28, 2013 at 08:14:05
“Helping the disadvantaged does help the middle class. You yourself said that we're the ones paying through the nose. If more people can get some upward mobility and move into the middle class, that's less disadvantaged folks who need help in the form of programs paid for by our tax dollars, more people who are financially independent. That's econ 101, sheesh. Not to mention, lower middle class is quickly sliding into the disadvantaged category due to ever-increasing income inequality that is a direct result of Republican trickle-down voodoo. Western Europe, chockablock full of "socialists" with health care and social safety nets, has now surpassed the US in upward mobility. Granted, its not hard to do, when all of us are sliding backwards.”
“I-Odin? Somehow the picture of Obama with blonde pigtail wig carrying an axe doesn't give me any warm fuzzy's. (Although I will give you that in his mind he thinks he's some kind of demi-god). ACA is (currently) law. That does not mean that when it proves that it is shown to be unenforceable and unworkable, that it cannot be rescinded and (hopefully) replaced with something that works.”
Oct 26, 2013 at 17:52:44
“Please check my other posts on this thread. That is not what I'm saying, or meaning. Pensions are earned by working. I am a firefighter and would love a pension, but living in a rural area we are all volunteers. We do get "paid", around $15 per call out, but that is turned back into the department for scholarships to graduating seniors from out local high school and for emergency relief funds for our local neighbors who have had a loss or family emergency.
In my original post, I pointed out the fact that countries like Denmark have an income tax rate over 60% and buying a car runs between $60,000 and $100,000. From my personal experience (foreign exchange students, workers on visas etc.), except for getting back to their familiies, most of the folks from there weren't really happy about having to go back when their visa expired.”
Frederik Blom on Nov 29, 2013 at 04:37:56
“The whole point in expensive cars, is the effect it has. And it's intentionally that we have such a high tax on them, and virtually everybody agrees to it.
It's expensive to have a car in Denmark, which causes a lot of Danes to use the Metro, the Bus or the Bike. Public transportation is cheap and efficient. 50% of people that live in Copenhagen ride their bikes everyday.
Our urban planning is focused on reducing the number of cars, making it a lot easier to use a bike as your means of transport, or the bus and metro.
We are talking about making inner Copenhagen car-free in the near future. No pollution and lot's of healthy bike cycling Danes.”
andycooke on Oct 27, 2013 at 07:40:19
“From my experience of living in several European countries over more than 3 years of my life, the quality of life, overall, was higher for more people, and the people were better educated and very happy.
Everyone in the world complains about taxes, but I think this a function of how the money is spent. I don't like my taxes being used as debt service and I don't like that we spend money keeping military presence in foreign countries.
Car prices are all relative. Your average European family owns one car, not 3. Each new car might cost a years salary, but then they do here also. Here people finance cars, and typically trade them out in several years, hence paying a lot of interest. There they pay cash for a car and own it for 20 years.
When I bought my Bosch washing machine 14 years ago I shopped around at many stores and looked at many models of washers. Inadvertently, the sales guy at Sears sold me a Bosch he did not sell. I asked why the Malaysian made Kennmore was half the price of the Bosch. He said "Europeans spend their money on items of higher quality because they don't want to have to replace an appliance every ten years..."
Thanks also for your volunteer service. My dad was a volunteer firefighter when I was growing up in rural Vermont.”
Oct 23, 2013 at 22:49:40
“Seeing as it's only 2013, I'm sure they still have a chance.
p.s. while there is a movement in Copenhagen to legalize grass and other "soft" drugs, you probably don't want to go there yet. (lol)”
Chorbadji Ganeff on Oct 24, 2013 at 20:11:41
“The qualifiers for Brazil 2014 are over and Denmark has no chance whatsoever. They did not even make the play-offs in November. I meant 2014, not 2016, there is European Cup in 2016. They probably will make that one.”
Oct 23, 2013 at 22:45:45
“No, the only Americans that think that way are those without, and want someone else to pay for it.”
andycooke on Oct 24, 2013 at 05:31:43
“If you are referring to greed then you are accurate, if you are making a blanket statement about low-income people then I do not agree with you. If you are a firefighter, then you benefit from socialist policy as much or more than anyone. I am not opposed to police and firefighters, but to deny that the presence and pensions is essentially socialism is simply inaccurate.”
“No, I actually find him overbearing and too full of himself. By the way, did you look at any of the trade info? Or are you one of those people who "know what you know" without letting facts get in the way?”
“Gee! Ya don't think that maybe, just maybe, the jury decided that he was not guilty....because he wasn't? Do a little research here. Look back to see how many shares of this stock were traded in the days before the announcement. How many news articles listed the rest of the stock traders being charged? NONE. How many has the SEC charged based on their publiished information? None that I can find. Lets face it. He's high profile, and it was a large block being moved. Just another fishing expedition by our current government.”
rfergu1188 on Oct 16, 2013 at 23:30:51
“Gee dont ya think that when your worth billions you can buy your way out of ANYTHING? I see you are a fan of Mark and in your eyes he is above fault.”
“The issue is not the raising of the debt ceiling. The main point (and what all citizens should be focusing on), is the amount of spending that the government is doing, with no thought to balancing income and expenditure. Until the citizens hold their elected representatives to the expectation that they do their job instead of playing political games/focusing on reelection, it won't get any better. On a side note, instead of reporting on the individual hardships of what has been curtailed during the shut down (again, playing games with public opinion), I wish the media would do some actual reporting work and dig out the expenditures that are NOT being curtailed (like Congressional salaries/expenses and so on.) It would probably surprise most people how much waste is still going on.”
thehardertheycome on Oct 10, 2013 at 17:19:45
“This issue is the debt ceiling. If you want to quibble about spending do so when legislation is being written.”
leftcoastindy on Oct 10, 2013 at 17:17:58
“so cutting the discretionary budget by 20% from 2011 is not good enough for you? Let them eat cake? I do agree they should cut the MIC budget by at least another 20%.”
“Dang! Don't the liberals hate it when they pay all that money and the politician doesn't stay bought?
Too bad. You helped create the problem, now suck up and deal with the aftermath just like the rest of us have to. Maybe next time you'll think about it rather than just following the check off.”