• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

People are so quick to judge. The GD thing hasn't even been up and running that long.

I honestly can't believe people are making such a big deal about it. Relax, give it time, and go get laid or something.
 
I can't believe that people got all wigged out over a comic and became defensive over something that even the President has admitted is messed up and needs to be fixed.

On a side note, you people need to stop watching that garbage on Fox News. Every time I turn around someone is posting something from there. I fear before long you will be quoting Limbaugh. Break out of your party shell and think for yourself!
 
No wiggin. I think we are just curious whose used it and what actual experiences have been. I know I am. When I wig its pretty obvious and also a bit more unpleasant ;)
 
imaplanner said:
The interesting thing is that if the private-federal partnership continues to fail, it will probably make a single payer solution much more likely. If the exhanges fail, that pretty much destroys the argument for near universal coverage being possible under a private business model, and that's not a good thing from a conservative perspective.
Click to expand...

While I will agree that if the exchanges don't work it will show that single-payer is the path we should take if we want UHC. My fear is that if the exchanges don't work people will look at it being a sign that government-run healthcare is the problem. I think we need UHC, I don't think the exchanges are the solution but I am pulling for them to work because it is still better than what we had prior to the Affordable Care Act.

I think the healthcare.gov site will improve. It was very stupidly designed with flaws like making you sign up for an account before even being able to shop for a plan, but I think it is all a lot of FUD while will subside once the site is fixed and people are getting insurance. Look back at how extremely unpopular and buggy the launch of Medicare Part D was back in 2005. The launch was plauged with delays, technical glitches, dropped phone calls, etc. The bugs got ironed out and now Medicare Part D is a very popular program with approval ratings polling higher than 80%, that once had lower approval ratings than Obamacare. Now of course there is a big difference between a perscription drug program and a whole new way of providing healthcare in this country, but I think this is a temporary glitch for Obamacare and not the fatal flaw that many on the right are spinning it as.
 
michaelskis said:
So let me ask you, is it working as it should without issues or typical bureaucratic runaround? Have you tried it?
Click to expand...

No, but I am not going around saying that it works perfectly either. If I just made the statement: "The website based portion of enrollment for the ACA is working great". And based that on reading some liberal website, I should be skewered.

Which is exactly what you did, but the other way.
 
Hink said:
Which is exactly what you did, but the other way.
Click to expand...

How do you know what I did or didn't do?

The cartoon was posted on FB to be by a friend. I thought it was funny, I knew it was political, so I posted it in this thread. It is no secret that the website has been an "epic embarrassment" (or that is what Nancy Pelosi called it).
 
michaelskis said:
How do you know what I did or didn't do?
Click to expand...

michaelskis said:
l6kv.jpg


I think this sums up the Obamacare website quite well.
Click to expand...

Because you posted this. That is how I know. You did that. I am lost? It isn't just an image it is your commentary. Which is not informed by actually doing it. Just saying you heard something about it.


---


The Daily Show strikes again...

Here's the Racist 'Daily Show' Interview That Cost a Local GOP Chair His Job
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/here-...cost-a-local-gop-chair-his-job-140119790.html

The sad part is, if you go to many small town GOP places you are going to find the exact same thing. Unfortunately I don't think this is a single instance....


---


Also, as a follow up to my Hannity comments before...

Obamacare phone operator who talked to Sean Hannity loses her job
http://news.yahoo.com/obamacare-pho...-to-sean-hannity-loses-her-job-010931794.html

At least he gave her something... but he did get her to lose her job. I think the company overreacted, but he had to realize that by putting these people in that situation, they were going to get in some trouble. It is just a really douchy thing to do to people who have nothing to do with the overall decision to have Obamacare.... :r:
 
Hink said:
Because you posted this. That is how I know. You did that. I am lost? It isn't just an image it is your commentary. Which is not informed by actually doing it. Just saying you heard something about it.
Click to expand...

Now I see... You don't find it appropriate that I post jokes about how bad the healthcare.gov website and the President telling people to call customer service on this forum page, unless I actually call the help line and try to use the website.

As for the Hannity thing, this is just one of the many reasons that I don't listen to his show and I hope that this causes him to rethink his tactics. I think that him giving her what she would make in a year is a small step, but if she tries to go work for someone else, they will want to know why she does not work for her existing company. Maybe Hannity should giver her a job working for him... but then again that might be worse.
 
michaelskis said:
Now I see... You don't find it appropriate that I post jokes about how bad the healthcare.gov website and the President telling people to call customer service on this forum page, unless I actually call the help line and try to use the website.

As for the Hannity thing, this is just one of the many reasons that I don't listen to his show and I hope that this causes him to rethink his tactics. I think that him giving her what she would make in a year is a small step, but if she tries to go work for someone else, they will want to know why she does not work for her existing company. Maybe Hannity should giver her a job working for him... but then again that might be worse.
Click to expand...

So you watch all the other Fox shows, just not Hannity.
 
I think the Hannity thing is instructive because its the perfect example of what is happening with the republican party. The mouthpieces misinform and the base believes it because they generally stay in the rightwing media bubble. we already had a great example of this a few weeks back with Mskis repeating complete falsehoods about Obamacare. It's not just Hannity. The same misonformation is releated ad naseum on all Fox News shows and nearly all right leaning media and talk sources.

I watched much of the hearing yesterday on the exchange website. The cynicism was incredible. We want the exchange to fail, we are actively encouraging people to not sign up, and now we are angry and demanding someone be fired because its happened! And the interesting thing is the ACA keeps getting more and more popular. Amazing.

It's instructive also to see that the rollout of the ACA is problematic in the same way that Medicare part D was, and that Romneycare was. The difference being that even people who did not support the laws worked to fix them and make them work - in the interest of helping people and the country function properly. This dichotomy is very informative on the general worldview of the two major parties and what they stand for.
 
Hink said:
The Daily Show strikes again...

Here's the Racist 'Daily Show' Interview That Cost a Local GOP Chair His Job
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/here-...cost-a-local-gop-chair-his-job-140119790.html

The sad part is, if you go to many small town GOP places you are going to find the exact same thing. Unfortunately I don't think this is a single instance....
---

.... :r:
Click to expand...

This is big not big news in NC - the state where it happened - news reported it and there is the obligatory response "this does not reflect the views of the entire Republican Party..." but that about it. BTW - Buncombe County is very red in color, but the county seat Asheville in pretty damn blue.


My coworkers mother called to get a quote from the ACA people. She has been paying close to $1200 a month on insurance for her and two kids from BCBS. The quote she got from the ACA with the same levels of coverage was $500 per month LESS. She asked BCBS to match and they wouldn't. Take that any way you want.


mskis - I think the issue most people here have is you keep "poking the bear" so to say to just get some response - it seems like its almost become a game.
 
Whose Yur Planner said:
So you watch all the other Fox shows, just not Hannity.
Click to expand...

:r: Oh yes... all the time,other than when Hannity's show is on. It is like a drug, I just can't get enough of it... I crave it... I NEED it! :r:

We don't have cable so unless my tinfoil hat can pick up the reception, the answer would be no. But then again I don't get CNN, MSNBC, or any of the other cable news channels.

Planit said:
mskis - I think the issue most people here have is you keep "poking the bear" so to say to just get some response - it seems like its almost become a game.
Click to expand...
I will keep that in mind...

Ahh... Wait, no I won't.

I don't care if it irks people causing them to get all defensive over the policies and boondoggles of the party of their choice.
 
michaelskis said:
:r: Oh yes... all the time,other than when Hannity's show is on. It is like a drug, I just can't get enough of it... I crave it... I NEED it! :r:

We don't have cable so unless my tinfoil hat can pick up the reception, the answer would be no. But then again I don't get CNN, MSNBC, or any of the other cable news channels.


I will keep that in mind...

Ahh... Wait, no I won't.

I don't care if it irks people causing them to get all defensive over the policies and boondoggles of the party of their choice.
Click to expand...
Just using the same logic you were using during the shut down.

But you get all defensive when that is done to you, then cry foul or change the topic:r:
 
Planit said:
This is big not big news in NC - the state where it happened - news reported it and there is the obligatory response "this does not reflect the views of the entire Republican Party..." but that about it. BTW - Buncombe County is very red in color, but the county seat Asheville in pretty damn blue.
.

.
Click to expand...

The guy resigned but is out there saying he was pushed out because the GOP is "gutless" and won't tell the truth - the truth being that most republicans believe what he said. Everyday I read about GOP officials saying things like this. Here is another one from today:

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2013/10/25/gop_lawmaker_says_obama_not_a_traitor_to_kenya.html
 
That was a quick response (and exactly the response I thought I would get) from you mskis.

Hell I even posted I thought your Peggy cartoon repost was funny (see #3292)

The reason I posted what I did to you was essentially the same thing a person who actually knows & likes you said a few pages back. See below:

btrage said:
M'skis, I like you bro, but you really do just regurgitate right-wing propaganda. You ask questions in this thread. People answer your questions. Then you shift and ask different questions. People answer those questions. Then you ask the original questions again, and it's one big circle. The majority of the people here are not trying to convince you of anything. But when your questions get answered you dismiss them as if there is no rationale behind the answers, then ask the same questions again.

.
Click to expand...
 
I am not sure how much Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius had to do with the creation of Obamacare and personally, I am on the fence regarding her having to testify before Congress. I don't anticipate that she will provide any new information regarding what the administration did, or didn't know regarding the repeated phase "If you like your plan, you get to keep your plan" which we now know is false. Some of the plans that people had apparently did not meet the requirements for Obamacare and will no longer exist after January 1.
 
michaelskis said:
Some of the plans that people had apparently did not meet the requirements for Obamacare and will no longer exist after January 1.
Click to expand...

Do you feel these requirements are a good idea? They are:

Health plans must pay for at least 60 percent of their members’ medical costs on average. Also, essential health benefits must include items and services within at least the following 10 categories: ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

Most of the people impacted are those that purchased insurance individually (as opposed to through an employer). Most employer health plans meet these requirements.
 
wahday said:
Do you feel these requirements are a good idea? They are:

Health plans must pay for at least 60 percent of their members’ medical costs on average. Also, essential health benefits must include items and services within at least the following 10 categories: ambulatory patient services; emergency services; hospitalization; maternity and newborn care; mental health and substance use disorder services, including behavioral health treatment; prescription drugs; rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices; laboratory services; preventive and wellness services and chronic disease management; and pediatric services, including oral and vision care.

Most of the people impacted are those that purchased insurance individually (as opposed to through an employer). Most employer health plans meet these requirements.
Click to expand...

Instead of responding, I will just refer to the President's comments:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoV0NeHNklk
 
michaelskis said:
Instead of responding, I will just refer to the President's comments:
Click to expand...

So...does that mean you feel the requirements are a good idea or no? I am already familiar with what the President said was going to happen which is why I didn't ask about that. But thanks for the reminder.I might have forgotten in the last ten seconds.
 
wahday said:
So...does that mean you feel the requirements are a good idea or no? I am already familiar with what the President said was going to happen which is why I didn't ask about that. But thanks for the reminder.I might have forgotten in the last ten seconds.
Click to expand...

You need to realize this is the new talking point for this week. The President lied. It is everywhere on right wing radio / tv / etc. I can pretty much sum up most arguments that are going to take place in here by listening to Hannity on Friday. By Monday that is the crap that we have to talk about....

:r:
 
wahday said:
So...does that mean you feel the requirements are a good idea or no? I am already familiar with what the President said was going to happen which is why I didn't ask about that. But thanks for the reminder.I might have forgotten in the last ten seconds.
Click to expand...

Do I think that the requirements are a good idea... no. I don't. I think that someone should be able to buy the coverage that they want and that they can afford.

Would I personally pay for insurance that didn't have what I needed, no. But different people have different needs.
 
michaelskis said:
Would I personally pay for insurance that didn't have what I needed, no. But different people have different needs.
Click to expand...

So,,,are you saying that there are people who DO have the need to "pay for insurance that didn't have what [they] needed?" Cause that's what it sounds like...

I find the base requirements a good idea and necessary. Its part of the admittedly painful process of increasing standards and, dare I say, regulating the health insurance market. Car insurance, for example, has minimum coverage requirements. Its not that outlandish to have them for health insurance as well. Or to amend them from time to time as is standard practice in other industries (like, say, the building industry). Many of the policies that will now not fulfill these minimum requirements were in fact drafted and sold by the health insurance companies AFTER the ACA passed but BEFORE it has gone into effect (those sold before, I believe, are grandfathered in). These companies KNEW that they would not qualify beyond 2014 but they sold them anyway. A last ditch effort to make some extra bucks…

If you have ever purchased health insurance as an individual on the open market you know that, like the phone carriers, they deliberately structure plans to be both confusing and to use terms that are difficult to compare across companies. Would it be better to have night and weekend free calling or unlimited? What about my circle of friends?! And which costs count toward my deductible? And the deductible is HOW much?! Prescription payment? Co-pay? (is that primary care provider or referral?) What do you mean my vasectomy isn't considered "preventative?" (true story)

Oh, and "Obama Sucks!";)
 
Last edited:
There is a lot of confusion and misinformation on the Affordable Care Act so this discussion isn't that surprising. Here is what I understand about this even as I still am a little bit confused about what constitutes a "change" in policy that would trigger a loss in noncoforming status.

Health plans in existence before the ACA were grandfathered in and supposedlly could continue to exist. Any time the policy changed it would lose its nonconforming status and would have to comply with the ACA. Health insurance plans are always recalculated and re-entered into each year and often you will enter into the same plan but the premium will be higher, but also, health insurers are always changing your plans every year so that it it makes more sense to the insurerers bottom line. People whose plans are being cancelled are being cancelled because the insurers have decided to change them and the new plans now must comply with the ACA since they have been changed. But as I understand it, nothing required the insurers to change the grandfathered plans. That is something the insurers decided to do based on their own financial incentives.

So as I understand it, the complaint should be more accurately phrased as "I am upset that Obamacare didn't force private health insurance companies to continue to provide a policy that they don't want to provide anymore." It's odd that the republican talking point of the week is essentially that obama should have forced private business to keep providing plans they considered unprofitable, but its also hardly surprising given the party's direction as of late.

So short answer is that most people and the media are misinformed once again. The ACA didn't force people to lose their plans. Health insurers decided not to provide the same exact plans anymore. Alternatively Obama is teh lair!
 
You know what Obama can't do anything right...

US budget deficit down to $680B, lowest in 5 years
http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-down-680b-204012669.html

I will say this though, this is crazy:

Revenue jumped 13.3 percent to $2.77 trillion. Government spending declined 2.4 percent to $3.45 trillion.
Click to expand...

Although I am not a fan of the sequester, the fact that all the cuts we did in the last year only accounted for 2.4 percent says we are cutting the wrong things.

The sooner we reform entitlements and the defense budget, the better off our country will be. We can't grow out of this. Last year is a great example of that...
 
Hink said:
You know what Obama can't do anything right...

US budget deficit down to $680B, lowest in 5 years
http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-down-680b-204012669.html

I will say this though, this is crazy:



Although I am not a fan of the sequester, the fact that all the cuts we did in the last year only accounted for 2.4 percent says we are cutting the wrong things.

The sooner we reform entitlements and the defense budget, the better off our country will be. We can't grow out of this. Last year is a great example of that...
Click to expand...

You forgot to add Obama sucks for mskiis benefit.
 
Hink said:
You know what Obama can't do anything right...

US budget deficit down to $680B, lowest in 5 years
http://news.yahoo.com/us-budget-deficit-down-680b-204012669.html

I will say this though, this is crazy:



Although I am not a fan of the sequester, the fact that all the cuts we did in the last year only accounted for 2.4 percent says we are cutting the wrong things.

The sooner we reform entitlements and the defense budget, the better off our country will be. We can't grow out of this. Last year is a great example of that...
Click to expand...

I think that is great news! I just hope that it keeps going that direction without raising taxes.
 
michaelskis said:
Instead of responding, I will just refer to the President's comments:
e]
Click to expand...

Well, of course they have the base all agimitated with this video. I wonder what happened in the intervening years to make that video so suddenly popular? I wonder....I wonderrrrrrrrr....
 
btrage said:
I'd start with deductions, but most likely a combination of both.
Click to expand...

I agree with the concept of eliminating all deductions.... for everyone, but I think it needs to be part of a more extensive fair tax that would eliminate the need for the IRS.
 
Toy guns (including airsoft) are required to have orange tips to indicate they are toys. BB guns and pellet guns are not required to because they are not toys and you must be 18 or older to purchase. While some toy guns look very much like real guns, even ones that don't resemble an actual manufactured firearm could easily be mistaken as a lethal weapon in the right setting. Either kind seems equally likely to get you shot if you aren't careful...
 
"Federal law requires toy guns sold by retailers to bear markings that distinguish them from real firearms. The most common method is by affixing a bright orange tip to the muzzle, though after sale they can easily removed or covered up."

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20131023/articles/131029824

But why aren't they required to do something that can't be easily taken off? The gun that the boy in Santa Rosa was carrying looked like a direct copy of the real thing.

If the police can't be blamed for shooting a kid carrying a toy gun that looks like a real gun, whose fault is it? The kid's? The parents? No one's fault, just somthing we all have to live with?

If you can't tell, I just really hate these stories where children are needlessly killed because of guns, in cases like this, or when a kid finds a gun at a friend's house, or the three year old that was killed in Yellowstone... the list goes on and on. :(
 
terraplnr said:
"Federal law requires toy guns sold by retailers to bear markings that distinguish them from real firearms. The most common method is by affixing a bright orange tip to the muzzle, though after sale they can easily removed or covered up."

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20131023/articles/131029824

But why aren't they required to do something that can't be easily taken off? The gun that the boy in Santa Rosa was carrying looked like a direct copy of the real thing.

If the police can't be blamed for shooting a kid carrying a toy gun that looks like a real gun, whose fault is it? The kid's? The parents? No one's fault, just somthing we all have to live with?

If you can't tell, I just really hate these stories where children are needlessly killed because of guns, in cases like this, or when a kid finds a gun at a friend's house, or the three year old that was killed in Yellowstone... the list goes on and on. :(
Click to expand...


I agree it is a tragic situation. It almost looks like someone cut off the tip of the fake gun to make it look real. I don't know the full background on the story. Was the kid instructed to put the gun down or did he point it at police? Just being in possession of a gun would not result in the police opening fire.

I think anytime a child get a hold of a gun and it causes harm, the owner of the gun should be charged with murder or attempted murder. Then people might actually think about properly securing their guns.
 
Whose Yur Planner said:
Please, please, please don't let this disintergrate yet another 2nd amendment pissing match.
Click to expand...

I agree. Let's change the subject.

You know it's been 40 years since Roe V Wade. Don't you think it's just the most immoral decision ever handed down.....:win:
 
Back
Top