kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
tytiger58 wrote:Let's forget for a minute who pubs or dems appeal too, lets look at what has been going on? Speaking for California only the Democratic Party has controlled the California Legislature for a nearly unbroken stretch of 42 years, now I know they don't control everything but we have always been a pretty left leaning state. So my question is, is California better off because of this? Are we considered a failed liberal state?? Who's policies should we use to recover from our financial mess to put it mildly? Or should we continue down the same path and hope it all turns around? "rant over"



I agree with you 100%. I really dislike the democratic party and their ideas. My point was that I want the republicans to win and make some changes. They can't do that, though, when they are perceived to be holding the gov't hostage, against equality and civil rights, and against women's rights. It doesn't matter if you agree with gay marriage or abortion or whether or not the pubs are actually to blame for our current situation. This is how the party is perceived, I think, particularly among my generation (not that we matter -- we don't vote because we're apparently dumb as rocks, but that's another rant). And honestly, this is how I perceive the party. I also honestly think that the party has largely left the republican domain and entered into the religious one. They're unreasonable and unmoving. And generally, people like acceptance over exclusion. I can cite many reasons for why I think these things.

There are things that the pubs theoretically "stand for." Those things have been put in the background by the party (and, of course, the democrats) and replaced with issues that are self-defeating and detrimental.

@Ron, I wasn't expecting anything, really. I was just trying to figure out if anything in the obviously leftist article made any sense to someone who is on the other side, but whom I thought (and think) can evaluate it without an incredibly tainted perspective.

(Sorry my post is so long. Yikes!)

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
kylemittskus wrote:I agree with you 100%. I really dislike the democratic party and their ideas. My point was that I want the republicans to win and make some changes. They can't do that, though, when they are perceived to be holding the gov't hostage, against equality and civil rights, and against women's rights. It doesn't matter if you agree with gay marriage or abortion or whether or not the pubs are actually to blame for our current situation. This is how the party is perceived, I think, particularly among my generation (not that we matter -- we don't vote because we're apparently dumb as rocks, but that's another rant). And honestly, this is how I perceive the party. I also honestly think that the party has largely left the republican domain and entered into the religious one. They're unreasonable and unmoving. And generally, people like acceptance over exclusion. I can cite many reasons for why I think these things.

There are things that the pubs theoretically "stand for." Those things have been put in the background by the party (and, of course, the democrats) and replaced with issues that are self-defeating and detrimental.

@Ron, I wasn't expecting anything, really. I was just trying to figure out if anything in the obviously leftist article made any sense to someone who is on the other side, but whom I thought (and think) can evaluate it without an incredibly tainted perspective.

(Sorry my post is so long. Yikes!)



No worries I know what your saying and agree, also I should not post in politics when i'm on hold with the Franchise tax board trying to find out why they want more of my money #@#@!@##$$

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
tytiger58 wrote:No worries I know what your saying and agree, also I should not post in politics when i'm on hold with the Franchise tax board trying to find out why they want more of my money #@#@!@##$$



I think we can safely assume that's a democrat-created problem.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

rjquillin


quality posts: 189 Private Messages rjquillin
kylemittskus wrote:@Ron, I wasn't expecting anything, really. I was just trying to figure out if anything in the obviously leftist article made any sense to someone who is on the other side, but whom I thought (and think) can evaluate it without an incredibly tainted perspective.

(Sorry my post is so long. Yikes!)

I'll reread it, I think I misinterpreted your question. First take was it was offensive, at least that's how I recall it.
Thinking of the current batch of pub party pols rather makes me recall a quote from Reagan; “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. It left me.”
Seems to make no difference which party it is..
Until we get some, IMO, less biased reporting in the news that X% of the general population digest, views/opinions counter to the current administration and it's policies will be unfavorably portrayed.

CT

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
rjquillin wrote:I'll reread it, I think I misinterpreted your question. First take was it was offensive, at least that's how I recall it.
Thinking of the current batch of pub party pols rather makes me recall a quote from Reagan; “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party. It left me.”
Seems to make no difference which party it is..



Me? Offensive?! I think that's a very appropriate and largely acccurate quote.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

rjquillin


quality posts: 189 Private Messages rjquillin
kylemittskus wrote:Me? Offensive?! I think that's a very appropriate and largely acccurate quote.

No no, not you, (bowtie perhaps ) the article, and I'll add much of TV news.

CT

chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim
kylemittskus wrote:I agree with you 100%. I really dislike the democratic party and their ideas. My point was that I want the republicans to win and make some changes. They can't do that, though, when they are perceived to be holding the gov't hostage, against equality and civil rights, and against women's rights. It doesn't matter if you agree with gay marriage or abortion or whether or not the pubs are actually to blame for our current situation. This is how the party is perceived, I think, particularly among my generation (not that we matter -- we don't vote because we're apparently dumb as rocks, but that's another rant). And honestly, this is how I perceive the party. I also honestly think that the party has largely left the republican domain and entered into the religious one. They're unreasonable and unmoving. And generally, people like acceptance over exclusion. I can cite many reasons for why I think these things.

There are things that the pubs theoretically "stand for." Those things have been put in the background by the party (and, of course, the democrats) and replaced with issues that are self-defeating and detrimental.

@Ron, I wasn't expecting anything, really. I was just trying to figure out if anything in the obviously leftist article made any sense to someone who is on the other side, but whom I thought (and think) can evaluate it without an incredibly tainted perspective.

(Sorry my post is so long. Yikes!)



I don't understand what the pubs stand for these days. I don't know what they are trying to accomplish right now. So much of the information out there is overwrought nonsense. This one was precious . And how many people believe it?

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
rjquillin wrote:No no, not you, (bowtie perhaps ) the article, and I'll add much of TV news.



Me? Offend? That is never my intention!

Lee Terry is an ultra pass interference by the way.

And I still say if the pubs were smart they'd let ObamaCare flounder and say see, dumb. Now elect us so we can get rid of this interception.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
chemvictim wrote:I don't understand what the pubs stand for these days. I don't know what they are trying to accomplish right now. So much of the information out there is overwrought nonsense. This one was precious . And how many people believe it?



It scares me that the reporter believed it. And that her research team, if she has one attached to her in some way, did as well.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
kylemittskus wrote:It scares me that the reporter believed it. And that her research team, if she has one attached to her in some way, did as well.



Wi tu lo

Holee fu.k

Bang ding ow

And you have a hard time believing that?

Also, dunno if you read sports guy on ESPN, but he has a theory called the Tyson Zone where you could put together the craziest outlandish thing about Tyson and you'd believe it.

The Obama Zone is the political equivalent. Conservatives will believe ANYTHING about Obama, provided it's negative.

And autocorrect can suck every part of my ass

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

klezman


quality posts: 130 Private Messages klezman
bhodilee wrote:Also, dunno if you read sports guy on ESPN, but he has a theory called the Tyson Zone where you could put together the craziest outlandish thing about Tyson and you'd believe it.

The Obama Zone is the political equivalent. Conservatives will believe ANYTHING about Obama, provided it's negative.



This is about my perception of the GOP in particular and a large portion of "conservatives" in general (whatever "conservative" means these days). The GOP seems to go one further, and *anything* Obama wants to do is automatically invalid and a threat to liberty. In fact, this is somewhat related to the post I put in the Pub.

2014: 57 bottles. Last wine.woot: 2011 Wellington Cab & Merlot, Roessler 2009 Bluejay, 2010 Bell Cabernet
2013: 66 bottles, 2012: 91 bottles, 2011: 92 bottles, 2010: 74 bottles, 2009: 30 bottles, 2008: 3 bottles My CT

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
klezman wrote:This is about my perception of the GOP in particular and a large portion of "conservatives" in general (whatever "conservative" means these days). The GOP seems to go one further, and *anything* Obama wants to do is automatically invalid and a threat to liberty. In fact, this is somewhat related to the post I put in the Pub.



These kind of attacks started long before Obama and maybe you should not paint a picture with such broad strokes IMHO, I imagine you paint this picture from random articles you read on Fox news/MSNBC or some other far left/right publication or posts? Based on that logic should conservatives believe that liberals are bunch of radical godless socialists? I choose not to perpetuate these attacks and I am sorry but I expect more from the highly educated forward thinking group that currently holds power. I can only hope that some group in the future will someday forget all this mud slinging and decide to work together...This is just my uneducated opinion and I hope I have not uninvited myself from from a dinner that i'm looking forward too.

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim
tytiger58 wrote:These kind of attacks started long before Obama and maybe you should not paint a picture with such broad strokes IMHO, I imagine you paint this picture from random articles you read on Fox news/MSNBC or some other far left/right publication or posts? Based on that logic should conservatives believe that liberals are bunch of radical godless socialists? I choose not to perpetuate these attacks and I am sorry but I expect more from the highly educated forward thinking group that currently holds power. I can only hope that some group in the future will someday forget all this mud slinging and decide to work together...This is just my uneducated opinion and I hope I have not uninvited myself from from a dinner that i'm looking forward too.



Good points. I admit I have the same perception, like Klez, but mine comes from people I know. I should ditch facebook because I get so much negativity and stupidity from there, honestly.

klezman


quality posts: 130 Private Messages klezman
tytiger58 wrote:These kind of attacks started long before Obama and maybe you should not paint a picture with such broad strokes IMHO, I imagine you paint this picture from random articles you read on Fox news/MSNBC or some other far left/right publication or posts? Based on that logic should conservatives believe that liberals are bunch of radical godless socialists? I choose not to perpetuate these attacks and I am sorry but I expect more from the highly educated forward thinking group that currently holds power. I can only hope that some group in the future will someday forget all this mud slinging and decide to work together...This is just my uneducated opinion and I hope I have not uninvited myself from from a dinner that i'm looking forward too.



No no no...don't worry about that. Going to take more than a little political banter to do something like that...what do you take me for?

I tried to indicate I was using some sort of "other" definition of "conservative" by putting it in editorial quotes. I don't really know what a conservative is any more, to be honest. I'm a raging conservative back in the great white north but here I waffle between the two parties. So I was not suggesting that one is always right and the other always wrong.

I think in the present shutdown situation, the GOP is almost entirely at fault, but hey, what do I know? It's also not worth fighting about.

Yes, I did not mean to suggest the approach of "the other guy said it and therefore I disagree" was anything new. What seems to be new, though, is the hyperbole attached to everything. Like the article I posted in the Pub, comparisons to Nazis, 9/11, terrorists, slavery, etc. I could easily be wrong, but it seems new to me. And both sides are guilty, although again right now it seems that the GOP is a bit more guilty than the Dems. Could easily be biased news viewing on my part, though.

I'm also thinking you read more into that post than was there. I certainly tried to be nuanced, but didn't have the time to properly caveat everything. I don't believe all "conservatives", regardless of how you define them, are mindless caricatures (the Tea Party, on the other hand, well the jury is out).

As the guy in extra long immigration limbo due to this shutdown, I also hope they work things out. I wish I didn't feel so strongly that the GOP is wrong this time around because that has me rooting against a "compromise", but c'est la vie. In general I'd much much much prefer that the politicians in this country cared more about the country than scoring cheap points and "winning the news cycle". Mud slingers are asshats.

2014: 57 bottles. Last wine.woot: 2011 Wellington Cab & Merlot, Roessler 2009 Bluejay, 2010 Bell Cabernet
2013: 66 bottles, 2012: 91 bottles, 2011: 92 bottles, 2010: 74 bottles, 2009: 30 bottles, 2008: 3 bottles My CT

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
klezman wrote:what do you take me for?



A Godless radical socialist of course

Politics have always been nasty at least in my lifetime, but where I noticed a real change for the worse was in the first Clinton term, when he first took office Rush L really took the bashing to a new and nasty level in my opinion. When the repubs took back the office I felt the dems understandably hit back hard, and since then no one is able to turn the other cheek and do any business IMHO..too bad really.

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus

Once again, McCain scores a point in my book.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
kylemittskus wrote:Once again, McCain scores a point in my book.



Why? I seriously dont' have time to search it out.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
bhodilee wrote:Why? I seriously dont' have time to search it out.



Nothing big, but he was on the floor and was really blunt and pragmatic. He said something along the lines of, "We all know this will get solved. The debt ceiling will be raised. Let's just get there already."

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
kylemittskus wrote:Nothing big, but he was on the floor and was really blunt and pragmatic. He said something along the lines of, "We all know this will get solved. The debt ceiling will be raised. Let's just get there already."



Shoulda voted for him again.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

klezman


quality posts: 130 Private Messages klezman
tytiger58 wrote:A Godless radical socialist of course



Yup, uh huh...totally how I operate. You know me so well!

Politics have always been nasty at least in my lifetime, but where I noticed a real change for the worse was in the first Clinton term, when he first took office Rush L really took the bashing to a new and nasty level in my opinion. When the repubs took back the office I felt the dems understandably hit back hard, and since then no one is able to turn the other cheek and do any business IMHO..too bad really.



Yes, this is also my perception, although based less on personal recall and more on reading. Also seems the rhetoric has dropped to a new level of nasty with the Tea Partiers, and that's dragging everybody else down with them. ymmv of who fired first, but I think we can all agree that this does nobody any good.

2014: 57 bottles. Last wine.woot: 2011 Wellington Cab & Merlot, Roessler 2009 Bluejay, 2010 Bell Cabernet
2013: 66 bottles, 2012: 91 bottles, 2011: 92 bottles, 2010: 74 bottles, 2009: 30 bottles, 2008: 3 bottles My CT

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
klezman wrote:Also seems the rhetoric has dropped to a new level of nasty with the Tea Partiers, and that's dragging everybody else down with them. ymmv of who fired first, but I think we can all agree that this does nobody any good.



It's o.k. if you feel the need to take one last shot at who is the nastiest/worst..don't make me mention who planned the Trade center bombings reports etc etc. We really need to work on the problems rather than take shots at each other IMO

Boy it's no wonder your having problems getting your green card...you Canadians are really dangerous people

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim
tytiger58 wrote:It's o.k. if you feel the need to take one last shot at who is the nastiest/worst..don't make me mention who planned the Trade center bombings reports etc etc. We really need to work on the problems rather than take shots at each other IMO

Boy it's no wonder your having problems getting your green card...you Canadians are really dangerous people



I did a quick google but I don't understand. The Trade center bombing has something to do with the current problems? Or Canadians?

dlschier


quality posts: 0 Private Messages dlschier

Interestingly, this shutdown logic figures nicely into other important modern day topics such as the major league baseball playoffs. See here

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
chemvictim wrote:I did a quick google but I don't understand. The Trade center bombing has something to do with the current problems? Or Canadians?



hmmm I guess it could have been Canadians but the firsters or whatever the hell that group was called claimed it was planned and carried out under the orders of George Bush.

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim
tytiger58 wrote:hmmm I guess it could have been Canadians but the firsters or whatever the hell that group was called claimed it was planned and carried out under the orders of George Bush.



Really? Oh good Lord, there is no hope for us.

chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim
dlschier wrote:Interestingly, this shutdown logic figures nicely into other important modern day topics such as the major league baseball playoffs. See here



That is hilarious.

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
tytiger58 wrote:hmmm I guess it could have been Canadians but the firsters or whatever the hell that group was called claimed it was planned and carried out under the orders of George Bush.



I believe that group was known as the TOUCHDOWN!tards. My friend is a member. Sandy Hook, false flag. 9/11, false flag. Stub your toe, false flag. My least favorite people.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

klezman


quality posts: 130 Private Messages klezman
tytiger58 wrote:It's o.k. if you feel the need to take one last shot at who is the nastiest/worst..don't make me mention who planned the Trade center bombings reports etc etc. We really need to work on the problems rather than take shots at each other IMO

Boy it's no wonder your having problems getting your green card...you Canadians are really dangerous people



Hm, didn't think it was a pot-shot or even stirring the pot. Aside from the conspiracy theorist nutbars you mention, I'm not sure what you're trying to say - I'm not saying one group is *worse* than the other, but was just saying my impression was the the origin of this latest descent was from one group, more or less. Then everybody else jumped in because what's more fun than character assassination? The people who called Bush 2 a war criminal were, to me, on the same level as the Newt-age stupidity. If there were people calling him a Nazi then I guess the lowering of the rhetoric happened even earlier than I recall. I think we actually agree, believe it or not - I'm not a fan of name-calling, I'd love to see the Jerry Joness in DC work something out. I agree that it being "bad" isn't new, but simply saying that lately (i.e. starting Nov 2008) it seems to have gotten even worse than it already was. No need to fight over who started the even-worse name-calling.

2014: 57 bottles. Last wine.woot: 2011 Wellington Cab & Merlot, Roessler 2009 Bluejay, 2010 Bell Cabernet
2013: 66 bottles, 2012: 91 bottles, 2011: 92 bottles, 2010: 74 bottles, 2009: 30 bottles, 2008: 3 bottles My CT

klezman


quality posts: 130 Private Messages klezman
chemvictim wrote:Really? Oh good Lord, there is no hope for us.



Based on what passes for "intelligent conversation" and "news" these days, I agree.

2014: 57 bottles. Last wine.woot: 2011 Wellington Cab & Merlot, Roessler 2009 Bluejay, 2010 Bell Cabernet
2013: 66 bottles, 2012: 91 bottles, 2011: 92 bottles, 2010: 74 bottles, 2009: 30 bottles, 2008: 3 bottles My CT

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus

Not to circle back, but I somehow never heard what the penalty for not having health insurance by X date is.

It's 1% of your taxable income. This is absolute BS, IMO (although I could be convinced otherwise).

If you I being "cited" for not obeying a law that is not based on financial status, i.e.: my income doesn't dictate my health insurance premiums, then why is it structured like a tax. IMO, this penalty shouldn't exist at all, but if I am being forced into buying something I don't want, and refuse, I should have to pay the exact same as another person.

To explain it from another perspective: assuming that I cause some negative economic effect on the economy if I don't have health insurance (not sure this is de facto true), is my effect worse if I make more money? If the answer is no, then why is the penalty based on income?

Off soapbox.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

rjquillin


quality posts: 189 Private Messages rjquillin
kylemittskus wrote:Not to circle back, but I somehow never heard what the penalty for not having health insurance by X date is.

It's 1% of your taxable income. This is absolute BS, IMO (although I could be convinced otherwise).

If you I being "cited" for not obeying a law that is not based on financial status, i.e.: my income doesn't dictate my health insurance premiums, then why is it structured like a tax. IMO, this penalty shouldn't exist at all, but if I am being forced into buying something I don't want, and refuse, I should have to pay the exact same as another person.

To explain it from another perspective: assuming that I cause some negative economic effect on the economy if I don't have health insurance (not sure this is de facto true), is my effect worse if I make more money? If the answer is no, then why is the penalty based on income?

Off soapbox.

The robes ruled this was a tax...

CT

kylemittskus


quality posts: 233 Private Messages kylemittskus
rjquillin wrote:The robes ruled this was a tax...



They ruled that this is how it was written or how it should be considered? Why the hell would I pay a tax to NOT get a service?

My head is going to explode.

"If drinking is bitter, change yourself to wine." -Rainer Maria Rilke

"Champagne is a very kind and friendly thing on a rainy night." -Isak Dinesen

tytiger58


quality posts: 74 Private Messages tytiger58
kylemittskus wrote:Not to circle back, but I somehow never heard what the penalty for not having health insurance by X date is.

It's 1% of your taxable income. This is absolute BS, IMO (although I could be convinced otherwise).

If you I being "cited" for not obeying a law that is not based on financial status, i.e.: my income doesn't dictate my health insurance premiums, then why is it structured like a tax. IMO, this penalty shouldn't exist at all, but if I am being forced into buying something I don't want, and refuse, I should have to pay the exact same as another person.

To explain it from another perspective: assuming that I cause some negative economic effect on the economy if I don't have health insurance (not sure this is de facto true), is my effect worse if I make more money? If the answer is no, then why is the penalty based on income?

Off soapbox.



I heard if you don't sign up you will get fined something like $300 + -, so if you get sick you will go into a hospital because you cannot be denied health care, get treated/ have surgery or whatever you need. And don't worry about it for only $300 you can have a major surgery and the rest will be taken care of by the taxpayers or someone else?

Who knows where I heard that from maybe a wack job right wing site so take that with a grain of salt.

Sorry another good bottle tonight

What contemptible scoundrel stole the cork from my lunch? ~ W. C. Fields

“Freedom is something that dies unless it's used” Hunter S Thompson




rjquillin


quality posts: 189 Private Messages rjquillin
kylemittskus wrote:They ruled that this is how it was written or how it should be considered? Why the hell would I pay a tax to NOT get a service?

My head is going to explode.

The administration first argued it was a penalty/fee if you did not register, that wasn't working, so then they argued it was a tax and permitted under the 16th amendment. John Roberts wrote the majority opinion but it seemed like it was a reworked from a dissenting view. Google is your friend here. It was ruled a tax, but even now the administration frequently calls it other than a tax.

Yup, exploding head. How that ruling was made is beyond mortal comprehension.

CT

rjquillin


quality posts: 189 Private Messages rjquillin
tytiger58 wrote:I heard if you don't sign up you will get fined something like $300 + -

No no no! You get TAXED.

CT

cmaldoon


quality posts: 62 Private Messages cmaldoon
kylemittskus wrote:Not to circle back, but I somehow never heard what the penalty for not having health insurance by X date is.

It's 1% of your taxable income. This is absolute BS, IMO (although I could be convinced otherwise)



It is actually $95 to 1% of taxable income whichever is greater for 2014. It then progressively rises to $695 to 2.5% of taxable income by 2016

kylemittskus wrote:If you I being "cited" for not obeying a law that is not based on financial status, i.e.: my income doesn't dictate my health insurance premiums, then why is it structured like a tax.



Except that your income DOES determine your premiums in a way. The law caps your expenses at 9.5% of income if you get it through work and you are exempt from penalty if the lowest cost plan availiable to you is greater than 8% of income.


kylemittskus wrote: IMO, this penalty shouldn't exist at all, but if I am being forced into buying something I don't want, and refuse, I should have to pay the exact same as another person.

To explain it from another perspective: assuming that I cause some negative economic effect on the economy if I don't have health insurance (not sure this is de facto true), is my effect worse if I make more money? If the answer is no, then why is the penalty based on income?

Off soapbox.



You don't cause a negative effect on the economy for not having insurance. You cause a negitive effect for getting sick or hurt, not having insurance, and having the hospital pay for your treatment anyway.

And for you argument about the tax... That goes out the window with all taxes. Why don't we have just a simple flat tax. The first $10,000 everyone makes goes to the government. We all get the same protection, right?


Back to your original point: I really don't find this to be BS.

2 questions:
1) who do you think should have health insurance and why?
2) how do you think healthcare should be paid for?

2014 - 20 Btl. Fjellene (10 bot), Urraca Chard (10 bot)
Last purchase: 5/3/14

2013 - 75 btl. 2012 - 98 btl. 2011 - 112 btl. 2010 - 30 btl.
My Cellar

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
cmaldoon wrote:You don't cause a negative effect on the economy for not having insurance. You cause a negitive effect for getting sick or hurt, not having insurance, and having the hospital pay for your treatment anyway.

And for you argument about the tax... That goes out the window with all taxes. Why don't we have just a simple flat tax. The first $10,000 everyone makes goes to the government. We all get the same protection, right?


Back to your original point: I really don't find this to be BS.

2 questions:
1) who do you think should have health insurance and why?
2) how do you think healthcare should be paid for?



Okay, so what your'e saying is that for 1% of my income I can go without health insurance and still get treated. So basically for less than one month's premiums, I can skip coverage, pay a penalty, save a ton of money and my family still gets access to health care?

Where are those opt out forms.

Even at 2.5% I'm still making money over 10 months.

This can't really be right can it?

Crap, I bet if I just saved that money I'm saving over those 10 months, I'd be able to pay for all routine visits and anything short of inpatient surgery.

Oh wait, that's why it used to be MAJOR medical right...

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

cmaldoon


quality posts: 62 Private Messages cmaldoon
bhodilee wrote:Okay, so what your'e saying is that for 1% of my income I can go without health insurance and still get treated. So basically for less than one month's premiums, I can skip coverage, pay a penalty, save a ton of money and my family still gets access to health care?

Where are those opt out forms.

...



Wait... It costs you more than 12% of income for medical insurance premiums?

My payment is about 1.2% of income ( a significant portion is covered by my employer)

Still, including that I'd be surprised if it were over 6%.

Yours must be a family plan for one thing.

2014 - 20 Btl. Fjellene (10 bot), Urraca Chard (10 bot)
Last purchase: 5/3/14

2013 - 75 btl. 2012 - 98 btl. 2011 - 112 btl. 2010 - 30 btl.
My Cellar

bhodilee


quality posts: 32 Private Messages bhodilee
cmaldoon wrote:Wait... It costs you more than 12% of income for medical insurance premiums?

My payment is about 1.2% of income ( a significant portion is covered by my employer)

Still, including that I'd be surprised if it were over 6%.

Yours must be a family plan for one thing.



Ah yes, I wasn't factoring in my wife's income. I want to say we pay around 1k a month though for family coverage through her company. I'll ask and get back with you (though damnit, I much prefer hyperbole to facts!)

Wow, I AM a hyperbolic bastard! I guess it's around $400/month for family coverage. Though I still think we'd be ahead to ditch it and pay the penalty and reap the tax payer funked you pay my bills now!

yep, adding my wifes salary and just relying on you all to pay our medical bills as they arise, I'm in the plus column for half the year by paying the penalty.

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."

– George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)

chemvictim


quality posts: 4 Private Messages chemvictim

Just to weigh in on insurance costs. I'm paying about $200 per month for a family plan (choices are either self only or family, same premium for 0 kids or 12 kids) and my employer pays $600. This was one of the cheapest plans available to me, it's a consumer-driven plan. By choosing a cheaper plan, I'm costing my employer less money too! Can I have a cookie?

I tried to post this yesterday but it wouldn't load. If it's up there somewhere, I apologize for the double post. On facebook, where I have learned to detest most people in the world, a friend of a friend thanks Jesus that her family member got disability. Why? Because he has cancer and they can't afford the treatment costs. I looked at her page and last week she was asking for a get-out-of-obamacare-free card. Soooo...she doesn't want to have to pay for this freedom-killing Obamacare insurance, but she still wants us to pay for her family member's care. Does anyone see a problem here? You can't blame this one on those damned liberals. There are plenty more like her - they just don't want to pay for their own interception in any form or fashion.