Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Shut it down!

View Poll Results: Will the Govt. get shutdown?
Poll Options:
Yup 9 votes (64.29%)
Nope 5 votes (35.71%)
Voters: 14. You may not vote on this poll
Shut it down! (Page 7)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 04:55 PM
 
If your intent was to insure as many people as possible, you’d have single payer. You also wouldn’t pay off big Pharma and the insurance companies.
Oh **** you. If it was single-payer all you'd hear from the rooftops is "SOCIALISM!"

Edit: If oly Obama would get off his knees and put the koran down, then everything'd be alright.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 06:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Oh **** you. If it was single-payer all you'd hear from the rooftops is "SOCIALISM!"

Edit: If oly Obama would get off his knees and put the koran down, then everything'd be alright.
Indeed. Single payer was never going to happen. When the ACA was passed there was a filibuster-proof Democratic majority. But there was not a filibuster-proof progressive Democrat majority. President Obama couldn't even get a single nation-wide exchange (i.e. competition across state lines) through the blue dog Dems let alone the GOP because of the conservative mind's irrational fear at worst and distrust at best of anything with the words "national" or "federal" in it.

OAW
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 08:48 PM
 
Bla Bla Bla. ANYTHING but cut spending.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 08:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Do the years 2000-2008 not exist for you?

Edit: Dammit now he's got me responding; I blame you besson
Sure they did. Didn't CONGRESS decide to go to war in Iraq? Didn't we have to rebuild our military after the Clinton years?

Compare the spending from then to 2008-2013. Lucky for us Obama suggested that sequester.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 08:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
The Republicans are asking the Democrats to negotiate, but so far the only item being bandied about is ACA funding with nothing in return. And one wonders why the Democrats find it unpalatable. It's not a compromise, it's a concession. With nothing given in return.
There in-lies the problem. The ACA was not the product of compromise between Republicans and Democrats, it was a change in a filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process that enabled passage of a major healthcare reform bill without the filibuster-proof majority Democrats otherwise needed and could not get. The House holds the purse-strings and we're not under a mob-rules system of government. Consider passage of a bill that manipulates 1/6th the US economy; Christmas Day for Democrats. Like anyone with children, one does not have to wonder about the question; "And you want how much more?!?" for very long.

If you have a better time for talking about spending with a debt approaching $17 Trillion dollars and what is being lauded as a "recovery" representing the fifth largest deficit in US history, I'm all ears.

Bwahaha, so what's being offered is government funding? So if the ACA didn't exist the Republicans would be doing the same thing? Reps don't think it's important to fund the govt.?
Of course they do. Do you realize that all Senate Democrats had to agree to was a one year delay in the individual mandate, among no less than 5 other delays and waivers, and an extremely popular repeal of the medical device tax? That's it. No one is hijacking the government. No one is blowing up the economy. (in a single, contentious political move that is) No one is acting like the Taliban. All other programs and entitlements and services would remain intact as would the ACA. You and I both know the Democrats could easily explain-away their vote for fair implementation and a compromise to reopen government and work toward solidarity in debt ceiling negotiation. Senate Democrats simply cannot afford to set a precedent for compromise.

Here's my favorite detail most people seem to gloss over – the continuing resolution the House did pass was only for a matter of weeks. So the House wanted the Democrats to delays the ACA by a year to fund the government for weeks. lol. Who wouldn't turn that down?
Was that before or after Senate Democrats put Obama's sequester back on the table?

70% of the people didn't support shutting down the govt. over ACA. So who's will is being represented?
I've already gone on record as being opposed to the shutdown, but I can empathize with the Republicans' conundrum here. Somebody has to talk about spending. Somebody has to represent those who are concerned about a mathematically inevitable debt crisis. And I mean concerned in that they'd actually take bold moves to do something about it. It just has to happen. I don't believe the House Republicans are asking for too much in light of their need to remain involved in the process, but I understand the political game enough to see what I believe is a net-loss to Republican political capital even if Obamacare does prove the failure they've all claimed it would be. I certainly hope we do not compound the stakes with a failed debt ceiling vote.

We'll see if the shutdown baggage carries through next year and who knows, in the meantime those obstructionist Republican bastards might drag Washington kicking and screaming into an environment more suitable to my daughter who's busily trying to develop her career.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 08:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I've already gone on record as being opposed to the shutdown, but I can empathize with the Republicans' conundrum here. Somebody has to talk about spending. Somebody has to represent those who are concerned about a mathematically inevitable debt crisis.
What do you say to the idea that the government shutdown is making the deficit worse on a daily basis, and putting some people out of work?
( Last edited by besson3c; Oct 14, 2013 at 09:10 PM. )
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 10:55 PM
 
ebuddy,

Come on man surely you know better. The individual mandate is the primary funding mechanism of the ACA. A year's worth of benefits ... e.g. coverage for people with pre-existing conditions ... without the mandate for younger, healthier people to get coverage to pay into the pool? Predictably, premiums would skyrocket in that situation and the GOP would have a field day with that. That is the only purpose that would be served by such a delay. Sorry, but I'm not falling for the old banana in the tail pipe trick.

OAW
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 11:27 PM
 
They still won't buy it, they'll just let the gov't take the much smaller fine out of their tax refunds.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 14, 2013, 11:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Shaddim View Post
They still won't buy it, they'll just let the gov't take the much smaller fine out of their tax refunds.

We should probably wait until the website is working more consistently so that we have data to base this on. It doesn't seem reasonable to assume that the fine will be much smaller.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 12:19 AM
 
The fine is relatively small this year. But it increases over time. The individual mandate and its accompanying penalty is being phased in.

OAW
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
ebuddy,

Come on man surely you know better. The individual mandate is the primary funding mechanism of the ACA. A year's worth of benefits ... e.g. coverage for people with pre-existing conditions ... without the mandate for younger, healthier people to get coverage to pay into the pool? Predictably, premiums would skyrocket in that situation and the GOP would have a field day with that. That is the only purpose that would be served by such a delay. Sorry, but I'm not falling for the old banana in the tail pipe trick.

OAW
No one's asking you to fall for some trick, OAW. The Employer Mandate is projected by the CBO to generate one-fifth the total revenue required to fund the ACA; $10 billion its first year of the $48 billion required annually to fund the ACA.

If it was politically tenable to delay the Employer mandate because it was too hard to understand and businesses complained that it'd be impossible to comply, surely we can extend this same courtesy to those who don't have an enormous lobby in Washington, don't at all understand what they're doing, and can't comply through a broken exchange portal.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What do you say to the idea that the government shutdown is making the deficit worse on a daily basis, and putting some people out of work?
I don't like the shutdown. I'm not for a shutdown. There are times however when a quarterback must drop back 5 to 7 yards to see the deep out. It's a setback to be sure, but not a permanent one. There is nothing in the US' current economic model that suggests our budgetary woes are temporary.

I realize the host of an intervention is not going to be popular with the addict, but he is battling against a very deeply ingrained problem and no one said it was going to be easy.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
The fine is relatively small this year. But it increases over time. The individual mandate and its accompanying penalty tax is being phased in.

OAW
*Hint: calling the tax a fine or penalty isn't going to win hearts and minds. If this is how you view it and it's only going to increase over time, this will be a gift that keeps on giving to Republicans.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 07:35 AM
 
For fun with OAW --

Just in case anyone still doubted that the DNC machine is a haven for neo-Panthers, we had this on full display when Democratic activists hijacked a polling place:


Not that it matters what flag you're holding at a Tea Party rally:
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 09:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
I don't like the shutdown. I'm not for a shutdown. There are times however when a quarterback must drop back 5 to 7 yards to see the deep out. It's a setback to be sure, but not a permanent one. There is nothing in the US' current economic model that suggests our budgetary woes are temporary.

I realize the host of an intervention is not going to be popular with the addict, but he is battling against a very deeply ingrained problem and no one said it was going to be easy.

Are you all for the ACA if it proves to not contribute to the deficit, or even saves some money?

Maybe you can explain to me what the Republican party hopes to gain from the shutdown? I'm still not seeing the wisdom behind this tactic. They had no problems putting the focus on spending cuts and will not have future problems doing so with budget and debt ceiling talks so long as they control the House, but all this seems to do is jeopardize their future control of the House. What you refer to as dropping a few yards back might be a whole lot more than that if they lose their majority in 2014.

Plus, let's be real, the Republicans don't really care about spending and the debt, they care about destroying Obama. If they really cared about spending and the debt they would be looking for ways to improve the economics of the ACA in the scenario that it can't be repealed, which seems more and more likely since they've tried, what, 40 times to do so? At this point it seems even more likely given what this has done to their 2014 and 2016 prospects.

There are also other areas in which they can make positive, constructive contributions. They seem to deem what the Left would deem as deconstructive (i.e. repeal, blocking stuff) as constructive, but they also have plenty of opportunity to make contributions in areas that both sides would deem as constructive.

Do you have any evidence that this party is interested in being truly constructive, or do you subscribe to the idea that what they are doing is constructive, and that they are doing everything they can to be constructive?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 09:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Not that it matters what flag you're holding at a Tea Party rally:

Now you're stooping into debunked conspiracy territory with this alleged quote. I think you know better.

Not that you'd care at all for the advice I have for you, but if I were in your shoes I would be distancing yourself from this part of the party, and bolstering the part of the party that is interested in constructive contributions.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 09:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
*Hint: calling the tax a fine or penalty isn't going to win hearts and minds. If this is how you view it and it's only going to increase over time, this will be a gift that keeps on giving to Republicans.

What happens to people that don't have auto insurance and drive?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 11:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
The House holds the purse-strings and we're not under a mob-rules system of government. Consider passage of a bill that manipulates 1/6th the US economy; Christmas Day for Democrats. Like anyone with children, one does not have to wonder about the question; "And you want how much more?!?" for very long.
I'm already confused. What's Christmas Day?


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Of course they do. Do you realize that all Senate Democrats had to agree to was a one year delay in the individual mandate, among no less than 5 other delays and waivers, and an extremely popular repeal of the medical device tax? That's it. No one is hijacking the government. No one is blowing up the economy. (in a single, contentious political move that is) No one is acting like the Taliban. All other programs and entitlements and services would remain intact as would the ACA. You and I both know the Democrats could easily explain-away their vote for fair implementation and a compromise to reopen government and work toward solidarity in debt ceiling negotiation. Senate Democrats simply cannot afford to set a precedent for compromise.
It's negotiating for a hostage. The republicans know they can't pass anything because they don't have the votes so they're using the funding as leverage.


Further, the ACA has little to do with the 2014 budget (spending is mandatory). It's a political move to try to make it an issue again in 2014 (Because that worked so well in 2012). Of course, they could just stand by, let it implement and run against its actual effects – but the GOP knows the looming threat is more effective a bogey-man than the actual implementation will be.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Was that before or after Senate Democrats put Obama's sequester back on the table?
Long before. The House tried to get the ACA concession before negotiating anything.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
We'll see if the shutdown baggage carries through next year and who knows, in the meantime those obstructionist Republican bastards might drag Washington kicking and screaming into an environment more suitable to my daughter who's busily trying to develop her career.
Stats Jesus says the shutdown will not have any real effect on the 2014 elections.


---

I'm going to pointedly acknowledge your emphasis that you do not support the shutdown and I ask that you do the same for my not supporting the delays in any of the ACA implementation.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 12:59 PM
 
It's very hard for me to interpret this whole thing as anything other than "we don't want to hurt your family, but if we do, it's your fault" kind of argument.

No. No it isn't. If you hurt my family it's your fault.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 02:42 PM
 
It also seems to me that House Republicans can't even agree amongst themselves what plan to pass. Their internal squabble is taking the entire country down, particularly if we default. Essentially, what it boils down to is that a subset of the Republican party is willing to allow this country to default because it can't get what it wants.

Not cool.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 02:50 PM
 
So you like the idea of raising the debt so we can borrow enough to pay our creditors?

See what 5 years of Democratic games, stupid wastes of tax dollars (Solyndra etc) and massive Gov't waste (GSA Scandal, Owe-bamacare web site) has brought? They need at least 7 milion to sign up for the ACA. Less than that and it collapses on itself. Some planning huh?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 02:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
It also seems to me that House Republicans can't even agree amongst themselves what plan to pass. Their internal squabble is taking the entire country down, particularly if we default. Essentially, what it boils down to is that a subset of the Republican party is willing to allow this country to default because it can't get what it wants.
That's not entirely true. It's possible non-tea party Rs support more moderate proposals, but are afraid to push or vote for them because they may get primaried, so that's on them. Or, it's also possible there's enough moderate Rs (see post earlier in the thread) to pass a bill in the House with the aid of the Democrats, but it won't get to a vote, so that's on Boehner.

If you blame Obama for emboldening the Republicans with his folding in the last crisis, then I blame the more moderate GOP members for letting this fringe run the show for folding to their primary threats. (To be fair in both situations its very likely job security is/was the #1 issue)

Edit: There's a certain irony in that Tea Party Republicans are idealistic, principled, serve the interest of their constituents, and seem to promote this above their job security, which is really what we all want from our representatives, right? The problem being that most of their constituents are ****ing crazy (Yes, I know I'll catch flak for this). If the rest of congress acted like the tea party, there'd be no issue (in the long run. I imagine negotiations would be louder and bloodier, though).
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
So you like the idea of raising the debt so we can borrow enough to pay our creditors?
At this very point of time, yes. The money is owed, this needs to be paid. There is time for debate on budgets, what should be funded, cut, etc. Now is not that time.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:01 PM
 
So in Detroit, the least expensive ACA coverage has near $6000 as a deductible.

Patients Pay Before Seeing Doctor as Deductibles Spread - Bloomberg
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
At this very point of time, yes. The money is owed, this needs to be paid. There is time for debate on budgets, what should be funded, cut, etc. Now is not that time.
NEVER time to do it right, but always time to do it over. Common solution to problems caused by idiots.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
So in Detroit, the least expensive ACA coverage has near $6000 as a deductible.
So...?

Many of the plans offered through the law’s insurance exchanges have low initial premiums to attract customers, while carrying significant deductibles and other out-of-pocket cost sharing.
It's called trade-offs. Is this somehow worse than someone getting bombed for the full amount even more because they don't have insurance during a catastrophic event?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
NEVER time to do it right, but always time to do it over. Common solution to problems caused by idiots.
Breathe.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 03:14 PM
 
I would love a $6000 deductible. Mine is much more.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:15 PM
 
"Breaking News: Fitch puts America's AAA credit rating on 'rating watch negative,' citing debt gridlock"

Breaking News & Top Stories - World News, US & Local | NBC News

A downgrade in the country's credit rating only increases borrowing costs thereby further adding to the deficit.

OAW
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:33 PM
 
DC Rumor....

Shutdown (well 20% shutdown) is smoke screen to change media focus away from horrid roll out of ACA. Media chumps.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
DC Rumor....

Shutdown (well 20% shutdown) is smoke screen to change proof positive the Tea Party is clueless because it changed the media focus away from horrid roll out of ACA. Media Chumps.
FTFY.

OAW
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
DC Rumor....

Shutdown (well 20% shutdown) is smoke screen to change media focus away from horrid roll out of ACA. Media chumps.

You're kind of all over the place.

Why has the roll out of the ACA been horrid? There has been some problems with the website, but this is not at all surprising for a system this big and with this much demand. The fact that demand has been strong could be considered a positive. I don't know what their usage projections were, but the number of people that have been trying to use the site has been massive, and speaking as a geek, it is very, very hard to simulate stress testing prior to a launch. The roll out will be horrid if these problems aren't resolved closer to the start of 2014, when it really matters.

Secondly, given that it shouldn't be a surprise that there are issues with the ACA website, why did the Republicans decide to shutdown the government? It was their own actions that led to this. If they wanted to shine the light on the rollout, what better way to do that than shining the light on the rollout, rather than on their shutdown?

Thirdly, you seem to be obsessed with this whole media thing. The headline on the Fox News site is shutdown related right now. Why would this not be the lead story? We are losing money daily, some people are out of work, and a couple days away from default. The plans obtained via the ACA website (which are private health insurance plans just as they are today) don't take effect until 2014.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:53 PM
 
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he was "proud" of Boehner's handling of the crisis. Then within moments he pleaded with Democrats to bail out the GOP, which he admitted has "screwed up" and "really did go too far" in the shutdown and debt limit standoffs.

"We won't be the last political party to overplay our hand," he said. "It might happen one day on the Democratic side. And if it did, would Republicans, for the good of the country, kinda give a little? We really did go too far. We screwed up. But their response is making things worse, not better."
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 05:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
DC Rumor....

Shutdown (well 20% shutdown) is smoke screen to change media focus away from horrid roll out of ACA. Media chumps.
Hmmm... what's a bigger story, the government shutting down for the first time in 16 years or the ACA website being poorly designed?

You know what, its too close to call.

Also, thanks to the shutdown chumps for unintentionally eating the blame on the ACA website rollout.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
"Breaking News: Fitch puts America's AAA credit rating on 'rating watch negative,' citing debt gridlock"

Breaking News & Top Stories - World News, US & Local | NBC News

A downgrade in the country's credit rating only increases borrowing costs thereby further adding to the deficit.

OAW
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:17 PM
 
Dakar, you are awesome at finding these graphical memes and dropping them in to conversations so skillfully.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:26 PM
 
We are literally days away from a potentially plunging the global economy back into recession or worse and the House Tea Party crowd has decided to pick a fight over birth control provisions in the ACA. Is there doubt left that these people are f*cking idiots?

The Dec. 15 deadline for government funding - a month earlier than the Senate was discussing - would give times for House Republicans to fight it out with Obama and Hill Democrats over provisions in the 2010 Affordable Care Act. These including the individual mandate, as well the requirement that employers provide coverage for birth control.
House vote delayed, chaos continues - POLITICO.com

OAW
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 06:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Is there doubt left that these people are f*cking idiots?
Anyone with a whit of sense knows they are.

And worse, there is a strong contingent of Teahadists and libertarians who really want to default on the debt. It's an ideologically-driven goal.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...the-goal/?_r=0
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 15, 2013, 08:51 PM
 
I'm late to this party following an abuse report. A lot of our members identify with one party or another, and I don't think we're there yet, but when you post, watch not to make your insults of a particular party a proxy to dump on your fellow members.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 06:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What happens to people that don't have auto insurance and drive?
They end up driving all their friends to the OWS rally?
ebuddy
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 06:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
You're kind of all over the place.

Why has the roll out of the ACA been horrid? There has been some problems with the website, but this is not at all surprising for a system this big and with this much demand. The fact that demand has been strong could be considered a positive. I don't know what their usage projections were, but the number of people that have been trying to use the site has been massive, and speaking as a geek, it is very, very hard to simulate stress testing prior to a launch. The roll out will be horrid if these problems aren't resolved closer to the start of 2014, when it really matters.

Secondly, given that it shouldn't be a surprise that there are issues with the ACA website, why did the Republicans decide to shutdown the government? It was their own actions that led to this. If they wanted to shine the light on the rollout, what better way to do that than shining the light on the rollout, rather than on their shutdown?

Thirdly, you seem to be obsessed with this whole media thing. The headline on the Fox News site is shutdown related right now. Why would this not be the lead story? We are losing money daily, some people are out of work, and a couple days away from default. The plans obtained via the ACA website (which are private health insurance plans just as they are today) don't take effect until 2014.
Too many IT experts have chimed in on the poor design, lack of real security and lack of testing that was done before the roll out. The proof is in the lack of success people have had trying to sign up or even look at the site.

lets try to be fair...

"President Barack Obama told House Democratic leaders Tuesday that he would veto debt-ceiling legislation if it includes a provision pushed by Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and House GOP leaders that would cut health subsidies for congressional and senior executive branch officials, according to sources familiar with the discussion at a private White House meeting.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blu...#ixzz2hsiuV8e3
( Last edited by BadKosh; Oct 16, 2013 at 07:01 AM. )
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 06:58 AM
 
Smoke screen BS. Media bias and propaganda instead of admitting that Democrats have pissed away too much money, raised our debt too high, and have no plans to ever control their wasteful spending. The methods being used by the TEA (TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY) party are trying to stop this and get our idiots in gov't to be much more responsible. I'd like them to close down every agency that has failed its original intent. (Energy, Education, HHS, Commerce etc) The ACA is unsustainable, poorly planned and not implemented as the law stated. The President has already violated the bill by delaying the employer mandate. Even more sad is that the ACA would still leave about 30 million without healthcare, just as it was before.
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 07:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I'm already confused. What's Christmas Day?
In context it means simply that Democrats already manipulated the process to give themselves a large present and now they want more.

It's negotiating for a hostage. The republicans know they can't pass anything because they don't have the votes so they're using the funding as leverage.
Yes, Republicans are taking advantage of a process available to them as designed in a system of checks and balances, but House Republicans have passed a number of bills in the last two weeks alone and they've passed a budget resolution for every year one was submitted by the POTUS. The Budget process has otherwise been hijacked by Senate Democrats since 2009 who could not agree on the President's notoriously-late submissions. Is there another time to talk about spending while the Budget process is being held hostage by Senate Democrats?

Further, the ACA has little to do with the 2014 budget (spending is mandatory). It's a political move to try to make it an issue again in 2014 (Because that worked so well in 2012). Of course, they could just stand by, let it implement and run against its actual effects – but the GOP knows the looming threat is more effective a bogey-man than the actual implementation will be.
But the problem is Republicans aren't the ones exempting, waiving, and delaying provisions of the ACA out of concern for its implementation. Democrats and more specifically, this Administration is picking and choosing which measures would be politically damaging and pushing them beyond the 2014 elections. Yes, these are most definitely political moves. That's why folks like myself would rather politicians not have as much stake in our lives.

Long before. The House tried to get the ACA concession before negotiating anything.
Well... suffice it to say the Democrats smell blood and they're perfectly happy holding the American people "hostage" while they beat up on Republicans. Otherwise, they wouldn't be trying to muddy the waters by putting up the only measure of fiscal restraint for elimination - the sequester. There is a plan to replace these short term cuts with longer term trimming and I'm interested to see how today plays out.

Stats Jesus says the shutdown will not have any real effect on the 2014 elections.
I agree with this, but I'm guessing the historic lows in approval currently enjoyed by the GOP is giving many of them pause for thought.

I'm going to pointedly acknowledge your emphasis that you do not support the shutdown and I ask that you do the same for my not supporting the delays in any of the ACA implementation.
I'm only compelled to do this when the issue has been framed as entirely the fault of one side of the political spectrum. There is a whole bunch of partisan wrangling going on and both sides are guilty of using these opportunities for leverage.

When the ACA is lauded as the Law of the Land, I use the delays, waivers, and exemptions to illustrate the folly in this Law. When folks complain that this legislation was passed by Congress, found Constitutional by the SCOTUS, and signed by the President; I'm compelled to remind them that this implementation is not what Congress passed, or what the SCOTUS heard, or the President signed. When people attempt to marginalize negative aspects of the legislation, I remind them of the delays, waivers, and exemptions to illustrate what its own architects think of these aspects. None of this is to suggest that you personally support the delays, waivers, and exemptions.
ebuddy
     
ebuddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: midwest
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 07:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Edit: There's a certain irony in that Tea Party Republicans are idealistic, principled, serve the interest of their constituents, and seem to promote this above their job security, which is really what we all want from our representatives, right? The problem being that most of their constituents are ****ing crazy (Yes, I know I'll catch flak for this). If the rest of congress acted like the tea party, there'd be no issue (in the long run. I imagine negotiations would be louder and bloodier, though).
The Tea Party is not violent. As a voting bloc they do hold fast to their principles and hold the establishment accountable for decades of failure. They are generally more educated, older, with higher incomes, and white, but these factors certainly should not be indicative of some pervasive social flaw as this could easily represent any number of blocs within the US. 54% identify as Republicans, 41% identify as Independents, and 5% Democrat. 40% support a third party. Their agenda or platform is certainly not extreme and can be found in the stumps and platforms of practically every politician who ever sought office;
  1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes - Excessively high taxes are a burden for those exercising their personal liberty to work hard and prosper as afforded by the Constitution. A fiscally responsible government protects the freedom of its citizens to enjoy the fruits of their own labor without interference from a government that has exceeded its necessary size, scope and reach into the lives of its citizens.
  2. Eliminate the National Debt - By implementing fiscally conservative policies at all levels of government, progress can be made toward eliminating the U.S. National Debt. Massive increases in the National Debt have created and continue to create a huge burden for the next generation of Americans, thus imperiling the country’s short-term and long-term economic health and prosperity.
  3. Eliminate Deficit Spending - All deficit spending must be eliminated immediately. We insist that government representatives at all levels maintain a fiscally responsible budget and balance the books as would be expected of any American business.
  4. Protect Free Markets - America’s free enterprise system allows businesses to thrive as they compete in the open marketplace and strive toward ever better services and products. Allowing free markets to prosper unfettered by government interference is what propelled this country to greatness with an enduring belief in the industriousness and innovations of the populace.
  5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States - The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government. This includes the Bill of Rights and other Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and their provisions designed to protect states’ rights and individual liberties.
  6. Promote Civic Responsibility - Citizen involvement at the grassroots level allows the voice of the American people to be heard and directs the political behaviors of our representatives at both the local and national level so they, in turn, may be most effective in working to preserve the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of this country’s citizens.
  7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government - A bloated bureaucracy creates wasteful spending that plagues our government. Reducing the overall size, scope and reach of government at both local and national levels will help to eliminate inefficiencies that result in deficit spending which adds to our country’s debt.
  8. Believe in the People - The American people, given their guaranteed freedoms, will thrive in a democratic, capitalist environment which allows individuals to strive toward ever greater achievements, innovations and the efficient production of needed and valued goods and services.
  9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics - American politics is burdened by big money from lobbyists and special interests with an undue influence on the peoples’ representatives. The Tea Party movement is seen as a threat to the entrenched political parties and thus is the continual target of smear campaigns and misrepresentation of its ideals. We choose not to respond to these attacks except to strongly and explicitly disavow any and all hate speech, any and all violence as well as insinuations of violence, and any and all extreme and fringe elements that bring discredit to the Tea Party Movement. We are a peaceful movement and respect other's opinions and views even though they do not agree with our own. We stand by the Tea Party beliefs and goals and choose to focus our energies on ensuring that our government representatives do the same.
  10. Maintain Local Independence - The strength and resilience of a grassroots movement is the ability of citizens at the local level to determine their own platforms, agendas and priorities free of an overriding central leadership. Exercising the clearly stated message of the Tea Party movement by its nature involves discourse about which policies and candidates best hold to our stated principles, and these various opinions should flourish and evolve at the local level.

The difference is they're willing to support the above even when facing political peril and make the difficult decisions regarding the more contentious movements of our time. This is not an extremist, whack-job political wing bent on destroying the US. Do not believe what the clown pundits on Comedy Central are saying and do not buy into everything you read and see in the Daily Kos and HuffPo. They don't like political opposition any more than Republicans do.
ebuddy
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 10:25 AM
 
ebuddy: at this point, hours before default, if the concern of some House Republicans really is birth control and/or satisfying lobbyists like the Heritage Foundation, Freedomworks, etc. I'm going to subscribe to Dakar's "****ing crazy" theory. I'll need many more paragraphs to convince me otherwise.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 10:45 AM
 
Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
In context it means simply that Democrats already manipulated the process to give themselves a large present and now they want more.
What did the Democrats manipulate? They wanted a clean CR. That's the status quo; No present there.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Yes, Republicans are taking advantage of a process available to them as designed in a system of checks and balances, but House Republicans have passed a number of bills in the last two weeks alone and they've passed a budget resolution for every year one was submitted by the POTUS.
Blah, blah, blah, the House Republicans are so noble because they're using the system as intended. Let's be real here: This is a last gasp to kill something they've tried and failed miserably to do countless times over.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Is there another time to talk about spending while the Budget process is being held hostage by Senate Democrats?
This isn't about spending. If it was they wouldn't be trying to repeal or delay all the ways ACA is funded.

P.S.The senate passed a budget back in March. So a good time to talk about spending would have been the past 6 months, instead of blocking a request for conference 19 times.


Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
But the problem is Republicans aren't the ones exempting, waiving, and delaying provisions of the ACA out of concern for its implementation. Democrats and more specifically, this Administration is picking and choosing which measures would be politically damaging and pushing them beyond the 2014 elections. Yes, these are most definitely political moves. That's why folks like myself would rather politicians not have as much stake in our lives.
I'm going to pointedly acknowledge your emphasis that you do not support the shutdown and I ask that you do the same for my not supporting the delays in any of the ACA implementation.

Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
Well... suffice it to say the Democrats smell blood and they're perfectly happy holding the American people "hostage" while they beat up on Republicans.
I love when Dems actually grow a spine they're seen as ruthless and evil. I can't even imagine the uproar if Democrats shutdown the govt over DOMA or gun control. Let's look at the reality here: The House used their position of power and threatened to shutdown the government if certain demands weren't met. The Democrats didn't fold and now you portray them as having bloodlust because...? Last time I checked they wanted a clean CR and the House still can't agree on that.

Also, I'm not sure in what world the Democrats are holding the government hostage when by your own admission its the House that has the power because they hold the purse strings.



Originally Posted by ebuddy View Post
When the ACA is lauded as the Law of the Land, I use the delays, waivers, and exemptions to illustrate the folly in this Law. When folks complain that this legislation was passed by Congress, found Constitutional by the SCOTUS, and signed by the President; I'm compelled to remind them that this implementation is not what Congress passed, or what the SCOTUS heard, or the President signed. When people attempt to marginalize negative aspects of the legislation, I remind them of the delays, waivers, and exemptions to illustrate what its own architects think of these aspects. None of this is to suggest that you personally support the delays, waivers, and exemptions.
...but its still not worth shutting down the government over it, right?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 10:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
ebuddy: at this point, hours before default, if the concern of some House Republicans really is birth control and/or satisfying lobbyists like the Heritage Foundation, Freedomworks, etc. I'm going to subscribe to Dakar's "****ing crazy" theory. I'll need many more paragraphs to convince me otherwise.
This is where I point out that Michelle Bachman is the Tea Party caucus chair. If Tea Partiers are sane, it does not show in those who they've elected to represent them.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 10:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
It's very hard for me to interpret this whole thing as anything other than "we don't want to hurt your family, but if we do, it's your fault" kind of argument.

No. No it isn't. If you hurt my family it's your fault.
Look who finally decided to comment. Your absence in this thread has been noteworthy.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 11:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
ebuddy: at this point, hours before default, if the concern of some House Republicans really is birth control and/or satisfying lobbyists like the Heritage Foundation, Freedomworks, etc. I'm going to subscribe to Dakar's "****ing crazy" theory. I'll need many more paragraphs to convince me otherwise.
It is NOT "hours before default", the US isn't defaulting on anything. We'd no longer be taking on new debt. The blatant media lies about this are what's driving people ****ing crazy.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 16, 2013, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
This is where I point out that Michelle Bachman is the Tea Party caucus chair. If Tea Partiers are sane, it does not show in those who they've elected to represent them.

I can see the Tea Party being rebranded as something else for future elections. I hope they form their own party so that they won't end up hiding.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:54 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,