Results 49 to 60 of 95
Thread: Government Shutdown
-
10-02-2013, 11:08 AM #49Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Harford County
- Posts
- 340
-
-
10-02-2013, 11:48 AM #51Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Harford County
- Posts
- 340
Re: Government Shutdown
-
Re: Government Shutdown
I would have liked it not to have come to holding the budget hostage, but the Senate has not been willing to budge, negotiate or anything. It's like there kids sticking fingers in their ears going "lalalalalalalalala" the whole time people are talking about fixing things that are broken with the law.
Hell they won't even go to the table to negotiate right now. I blame the Dems/Senate for getting us to this point and the Republicans/House for what's been going on since then.
-
10-02-2013, 12:09 PM #53Regular 1st Stringer
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- Harford County
- Posts
- 340
Re: Government Shutdown
The orders from the top to the Dem Senate (as i understand it) were: no negotiating on ACA as part of the budget process. I'm hoping that once the budget is in place, the spoiled brats we elected to run our country can rediscover working together towards a common goal.
I despised a lot about Teddy Kennedy, but I think he was the last one to actually reach across the aisle and try to find some give and take. Our current leadership (I disgust myself using that word to describe them) has shown no inclination to do so, and amazingly, both sides believe they're doing the right thing. There is no perfect Dem solution; there is no perfect GOP solution. Until both sides realize and accept that, we will continue to get screwed.
-
-
10-02-2013, 05:39 PM #55Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Posts
- 4,553
Re: Government Shutdown
The choice is to keep sending bills that fund the rest of the government to the Senate. It certainly should make a thinking person laugh at loud when the Senate simultaneously whines about the dangers of Department X being shutdown as they reject a resolution that specifically funds Department X.
The relevant issues here are that 1) Obamacare is not popular (and was passed by hook and crook), and 2) Obama has already unilaterally delayed several facets the law (unconstitutionally).
Without these two points, the Republicans' stand would look very bad. But with these two points, their stance looks perfectly reasonable (no special treatment for Congress, and one year delay of individual mandate to go along with Obama's one year delay by fiat of the employer mandate and eligibility requirements).
-
10-02-2013, 07:04 PM #56Legendary RSR Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Houston, TX Y'all
- Posts
- 34,414
Re: Government Shutdown
Clinton came out smelling like shit after the last shut down.
Given the lack of favor people keep showing Obamacare, I expect Obama to come out smelling in a similar fashion, in spite of the MSM's attempts otherwise.
-
Re: Government Shutdown
So, about that people liking Obamacare ;)
http://m.nationalreview.com/corner/3...andrew-johnson
Also, even if and thats a big if, the websites are crashing cause tons of traffic, doesnt mean visitors are siging up
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-websites.html
-
Re: Government Shutdown
I actually read a lot about what the law does and even though they are going to "tax" those who don't get health insurance, the tax won't be enforced... At least that's how I'm interpreting it.
It also sounds like the law really isn't doing the poor any favors at all. However, that has been one of the main marketing points of the whole thing.
Weird.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now FreeDisclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
-
Re: Government Shutdown
The article you linked says 0 enrolled but because of the sites issues, not that they werent getting on the actual enrollment website. Thats basically what all the websites are saying. People are trying to sign up and it caused issues. this to me is still supporting the original link i posted. They didnt plan on that much traffic immediately, which you can take either way as how confident they were or how many interested people there are.
This makes 39million people that choose not to be insured and many of which dont pay their medical bills, be responsible for themselves and their impact on society. So no, I dont think its as pro lower income as they would suggest. adding those people to the insurance pool should help out the rest of us and medical field in general. At least in theory. Obviously some dont believe so.
An unenforced "tax" seems odd to me. Not sure what the point of even having it would be?-JAB
-
Re: Government Shutdown
One thing that I don't like about the law is that they are planning on taking from hospital reimbursements. That's not awesome.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now FreeDisclaimer: The content posted is of my own opinion.
Bookmarks