Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Fateweaver wrote:
Rushing something behind closed doors to prevent anyone from stopping it or questioning it is not being very transparent.

What closed doors? And what rushing? All the legislation is available for you to read, and has been throughout the process (including when the most official thing being discussed were draft bills);with the debate itself having so far lasted nearly a year.

Representative democracy is not about total transparency, which is why the promise to televise negotiations was stupid. Not only because there's no reason for them to be on TV, but because any televised negotiation would be unlikely to differ from nominal session of Congress in terms of formality.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:Regardless though, the reconciled bill is likely to look incredibly similar to the one that is already on public record, which you haven't looked at.

I expect either the public option, or mandatory carriage to get the axe in the course of negotiations. But we'll see.

I love how this thread had turned away from "What's wrong with Obama" to "America is too stupid to understand anything and needs really smart people to think for them".

What's wrong with Obama is he is a politician. He's willing to lie, cheat and steal to get power and prestige. He thinks that scoring higher on an IQ test than some people makes his morality higher than others. He thinks that he can tell the stupid, huddled masses anything to get elected and that he doesn't have to follow through. He thinks his agenda for America is more important than the average Joe putting food on the table. He thinks only big government can provide all the requirements for life and happiness to people. He's in love with government and will do everything in his power to cram his agenda down our throats whether we like it or not, because he thinks he can.

In short, he knows what's best for you and you best sit down, shut up and do what he says.

I love how this thread had turned away from "What's wrong with Obama" to "America is too stupid to understand anything and needs really smart people to think for them".

Glad we have you to shepherd it back to the right path with your insightful comments.

In short, he knows what's best for you and you best sit down, shut up and do what he says.

No thats me, it's true, and I don't think most of your post is particularly true or well thought out. However! I also think it utterly pointless to refute.

Wheres that bus.. I'm thinking it's time to use it.

ShumaGorath wrote:Glad we have you to shepherd it back to the right path with your insightful comments.

Love you too Shuma.

ShumaGorath wrote:Wheres that bus.. I'm thinking it's time to use it.

Look out... I'm driving it.

Love you too Shuma.

Bawwww.

Look out... I'm driving it.

Crap.

The Green Git wrote:I love how this thread had turned away from "What's wrong with Obama" to "America is too stupid to understand anything and needs really smart people to think for them".

It has nothing to do with intelligence, not really. Intelligence governs how quickly a person can learn, and understand something. Anyone can learn anything provided they are willing to devote enough effort to the task. The problem is that the majority of people don't devote a whole lot of effort to politics; preferring to follow first impressions instead of continuing the process of reflection on an idea. Realistically that's true of most disciplines which aren't considered by a given individual to be a specialization.

The Green Git wrote:
He thinks that he can tell the stupid, huddled masses anything to get elected and that he doesn't have to follow through.

History proves that thought correct; primarily because the huddled masses tend to be, if not stupid, ignorant of the relevant issues.

The Green Git wrote:
In short, he knows what's best for you and you best sit down, shut up and do what he says.

He doesn't know what's best for individuals, nor could anyone. He doesn't know what's best for the nation, nor could anyone. However, he believes that certain policies will make the nation a better place. That has very little to do with the best choices to be made by individuals. Individuals are functionally irrelevant to demographics.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:However! I also think it utterly pointless to refute.

Picked up that belief around the time of that 3-way discussion of the meaning of 'republic'?

Frazzled wrote:I thought I was the classiest. make up your mind Shuma. If I wear a cool tophat and cane would that put me over the top?

OK show of hands for who wants to see a viral video of Frazzled in tophat and tails doing the ritz dance?



GG

NO I am sure there's a provision in the Geneva Convention prohibiting that by name somewhere.

http://www.wikio.com/video/1461153

The Dems don't read the bills, and even make fun of the voters that ask them to read it.

My problems with the bill(s)

1. You are taxed for 4 years before coverage starts. Thats like making a house payment for 4 years before you get to move in it.

2. I don't like the fact that the Federal government can require you to purchase something you may or may not need. Whats next? Requiring all Americans to purchase a new Chevy every 2 years?

3. The government has never been able to control cost of anything they do. $500.00 Hammers anyone?

4. The power of this bill far exceeds the limits placed on the Federal Government in the Constitution. (see #2)

Is it not the case that currently you are taxed for a working lifetime before the pensioners' coverage starts?

Kilkrazy wrote:Is it not the case that currently you are taxed for a working lifetime before the pensioners' coverage starts?

Does that make it a good thing or a bad thing?

Not necessarily KK. There are multiple circumstances where that is not the case ( I am assuming you are referring to Social Security).

Also there is a strong constitutionality issue which WILL be tested in the courts, if the legislation passes.

jbunny wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Is it not the case that currently you are taxed for a working lifetime before the pensioners' coverage starts?

Does that make it a good thing or a bad thing?

I assume from your point no.1 it is a bad thing.

Frazzled wrote:Not necessarily KK. There are multiple circumstances where that is not the case ( I am assuming you are referring to Social Security).

I meant the kind of government provided health insurance which pensioners get. I don't remember the name, either Medicaid or Medicare.

Perhaps some people get it early but the point about the UK system is that everyone gets it all the time.

Frazzled wrote:Also there is a strong constitutionality issue which WILL be tested in the courts, if the legislation passes.

That is quite proper and a necessary step for lots of major legislation.

Medicare for Sr. citizens of poor income. Medicaid for everyone of poor income.

The reason we are paying for years, is because we are paying for people who are not working and contributing their share.

Frazzled wrote:And now the foreigners opine on why Obama President is Best President!

They can have him!

jbunny wrote:The reason we are paying for years, is because we are paying for people who are not working and contributing their share.

That and the incessant whining whenever they talk about raising taxes to pre bush era levels. Who exactly are you talking about in this instance though? Illegals? I bet its illegal foreign workers, since in a nation with 10% unemployment you can't mean everyone else. That would just be insensitive.

Frazzled wrote:Medicare for Sr. citizens of poor income. Medicaid for everyone of poor income.

Raise the tax burden high enough, and everybody becomes "poor".

Which is the plan, right?

Note to self, Don`t start a tread about anything remotely political here. In fact NEVER discuss that subject here. But back on topic, I have not been following the news about the previous mentioned president, what has changed since last? Anyone care to enlighten me?

Anshal wrote:I have not been following the news about the previous mentioned president, what has changed since last?

Obama appears to have finally passed a big pork barrel in the name of healtcare.

This is exciting, because it means that he'll finally have actually done *something* as President.

ShumaGorath wrote:

jbunny wrote:The reason we are paying for years, is because we are paying for people who are not working and contributing their share.

That and the incessant whining whenever they talk about raising taxes to pre bush era levels. Who exactly are you talking about in this instance though? Illegals? I bet its illegal foreign workers, since in a nation with 10% unemployment you can't mean everyone else. That would just be insensitive.

I mean people that do not work due to various factors. People not able to work due to health problems, as well as people who just don't want to work. Funny thing about the unemployment rate, it only counts people actually looking for employment. So they guy that just sits on his moms couch does not effect the unemployment rate.

We are also paying for the childern of the people that do not work. I knew a guy who collected SS in highschool, and never had a job because his parents were that old.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Anshal wrote:I have not been following the news about the previous mentioned president, what has changed since last?

Obama appears to have finally passed a big pork barrel in the name of healtcare.

This is exciting, because it means that he'll finally have actually done *something* as President.

Guess another Nobel Peace Prize is on it's way.

Shuma, you mean the tax rates we had under that leftie Reagan?

The American people are pretty easy to figure out. We want the government to provide universal healthcare, protect us from growing outside and inside threats, repair aging roads, bridges and infrastructure, bail us out if we make bad financial decisions or make risky investments, extend unemployment benefits and COBRA...

...and never have a bill come due for any of it. 'Cause you know, if it wasn't for welfare moms with 37 kids and freeloading illegal aliens using up trillions in resources, we could do all the above and give every red-blooded American citizen a 20% tax cut. Rush told me so.

jbunny wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Anshal wrote:I have not been following the news about the previous mentioned president, what has changed since last?

Obama appears to have finally passed a big pork barrel in the name of healtcare.

This is exciting, because it means that he'll finally have actually done *something* as President.

Guess another Nobel Peace Prize is on it's way.

Been there, done that, got the medal.


Maybe he can be Time's Man of the Year?

Oh, wait, that was last year...


Crap.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Anshal wrote:I have not been following the news about the previous mentioned president, what has changed since last?

Obama appears to have finally passed a big pork barrel in the name of healtcare.

This is exciting, because it means that he'll finally have actually done *something* as President.

He also brought about change. Democrats are becoming Republicans and it looks like Mass. will have a Republican in TK's old seat.

That's also doing something too.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Medicare for Sr. citizens of poor income. Medicaid for everyone of poor income.

Raise the tax burden high enough, and everybody becomes "poor".

Which is the plan, right?

Yeah, raise the taxes high enough and we might actually start making as much per capita as Denmark or Germany. How awful that would be!

He also brought about change. Democrats are becoming Republicans and it looks like Mass. will have a Republican in TK's old seat.

And all he had to do was have absolutely nothing to do with the recession that cause that very change! Remember kids, vote republican when you want economic bubbles, and vote republican because democrats don't know how to handle the economy. I mean, the economy crashed then a Democrat got into office! He must have caused it! Vote red!

O.o thanks for enlightening me fellow Dakkataits, your all in my cookie book now. Anyways so to sum it up he has frakked it up? Or has he salvaged the situation? I ask as a person who normally gives a squid about politicians outside my own land. But I sense a fractured DakkaDakka on the subject of Obama & co

ShumaGorath wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Medicare for Sr. citizens of poor income. Medicaid for everyone of poor income.

Raise the tax burden high enough, and everybody becomes "poor".

Which is the plan, right?

Yeah, raise the taxes high enough and we might actually start making as much per capita as Denmark or Germany. How awful that would be!

I must admit, I did my studies before "new math," but the mathmatics of that statement eludes me.

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Medicare for Sr. citizens of poor income. Medicaid for everyone of poor income.

Raise the tax burden high enough, and everybody becomes "poor".

Which is the plan, right?

Yeah, raise the taxes high enough and we might actually start making as much per capita as Denmark or Germany. How awful that would be!

I must admit, I did my studies before "new math," but the mathmatics of that statement eludes me.

I was just using the same logic DD was. That being hyperbolicdemsareeviltaxeswillkillusDEATHPANELSDEATHPANELSDEATHPANELSmuslimsareruiningourculturewithminnarettes! logic.

Well his statement is mathmatically accurate. Raise taxes enough and their remaining income can fall into the definition.

Frazzled wrote:Well his statement is mathmatically accurate. Raise taxes enough and their remaining income can fall into the definition.

True. You can also eat yourself to death and spend so much time on a beach you die of cancer. Mathematical possibility and modern precedent do not line up. America has some of the lowest taxes of any modern western nation. It also spends more per capita on health care than any other nation. Those two facts line up perfectly. Not all "taxes" come from the government.