NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
Shut 'em Down! |
||
Shut 'em down!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
I'll raise you a...
EDIT: Also, for those who use the "What's going on in...Oh Lawd!" meme to death, same movie. Useless trivia, enjoy. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » [What did the Republicans contribute to a bill they didn't want? they actually wrote most of it...it was called Romneycare. which was a *** child/direct result of Hillarycare. Right so if you are sitting there scratching your head wondering why the tea party is opposed to a bill the republicans wrote in the first place... the answer is the individual mandate which was fine on the state level but on the federal level goes against their basic anti federalist instincts. It's absolutely an affront to libertarianism. But instead of talking about it as what it is, they demonize it as socialism, marxism, unconstitutional, government takeover, claim it's going to kill small businesses (which are the ones NOT effected by it), make up jail sentences for violators, wildly exaggerate individual cost, etc. Yet, like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills: Their policies were being replaced with pricier plans that conform to all the requirements of the new health care law. Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four. Keep digging! Individual policies are dead, that's the point. The individual mandate allows consumers to approach insurance providers as a group with much higher purchasing power. You show an absolute lack of understanding of even basic economic functions. EDIT: you might also want to read the rest of that article, as it takes a lot of the steam out of your point. Odin.Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » [What did the Republicans contribute to a bill they didn't want? they actually wrote most of it...it was called Romneycare. which was a *** child/direct result of Hillarycare. Right so if you are sitting there scratching your head wondering why the tea party is opposed to a bill the republicans wrote in the first place... the answer is the individual mandate which was fine on the state level but on the federal level goes against their basic anti federalist instincts. It's absolutely an affront to libertarianism. But instead of talking about it as what it is, they demonize it as socialism, marxism, unconstitutional, government takeover, claim it's going to kill small businesses (which are the ones NOT effected by it), make up jail sentences for violators, wildly exaggerate individual cost, etc. Yet, like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills: Their policies were being replaced with pricier plans that conform to all the requirements of the new health care law. Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four. Keep digging! Individual policies are dead, that's the point. The individual mandate allows consumers to approach insurance providers as a group with much higher purchasing power. You show an absolute lack of understanding of even basic economic functions. EDIT: you might also want to read the rest of that article, as it takes a lot of the steam out of your point. Sorry, Obama said your premiums would go down, they didn't. You just said cost increases were wildly exaggerated, they clearly aren't. Like I said, keep digging. I really don't know why libertarians keep linking sob stories about skyrocketing premiums and all those oh so sad stories of people who are being sodomized by the government and Obama when effectively your solution is to cede all power to the free market whose sole purpose is to milk profits at almost any cost. You know, things like pre-existing conditions and throwing up every possible roadblock to getting decent healthcare.
If you oppose Obamacare, fine. But don't pretend as if you give a ***about any of the people you use as examples when your solution is bootstraps, 'people should fail', free market worship and Randian doctrine. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Shiva.Nikolce said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » [What did the Republicans contribute to a bill they didn't want? they actually wrote most of it...it was called Romneycare. which was a *** child/direct result of Hillarycare. Right so if you are sitting there scratching your head wondering why the tea party is opposed to a bill the republicans wrote in the first place... the answer is the individual mandate which was fine on the state level but on the federal level goes against their basic anti federalist instincts. It's absolutely an affront to libertarianism. But instead of talking about it as what it is, they demonize it as socialism, marxism, unconstitutional, government takeover, claim it's going to kill small businesses (which are the ones NOT effected by it), make up jail sentences for violators, wildly exaggerate individual cost, etc. Yet, like many other Bay Area residents who pay for their own medical insurance, they were floored last week when they opened their bills: Their policies were being replaced with pricier plans that conform to all the requirements of the new health care law. Vinson, of San Jose, will pay $1,800 more a year for an individual policy, while Waschura, of Portola Valley, will cough up almost $10,000 more for insurance for his family of four. Keep digging! Individual policies are dead, that's the point. The individual mandate allows consumers to approach insurance providers as a group with much higher purchasing power. You show an absolute lack of understanding of even basic economic functions. EDIT: you might also want to read the rest of that article, as it takes a lot of the steam out of your point. Sorry, Obama said your premiums would go down, they didn't. You just said cost increases were wildly exaggerated, they clearly aren't. Like I said, keep digging. The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down, those people's premiums went up because their policies were incomplete. And considering that only ~16 million americans are even effected by that and 60% of those will qualify for subsidies, and all of those people could get MUCH lower rates by participating in a group buying program like the exchanges, it IS wildly exaggerated. Even your article explains all of that, yet you can't get off that talking point. You proved yourself wrong and still won't admit you're wrong. Caitsith.Zahrah said: » I think he might be referring to the nutter, Ayn Rand. oops. ***, you're probably right. I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system:
A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people Odin.Jassik said: » The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down Caitsith.Zahrah said: » Useless trivia. So it has come to this.... Well then I would like to go ahead and take this opportunity to thank everyone for their participation....yes even Nausi. Thank you for the spagettios and soviet era famine... If nothing else Campbells soup stock is probably roaring back as we speak. and even sparthosx even though he made the same exact post 147 times... I'm sure nobody learned anything... but whatever we did do when we were ignoring each other, we did it with gusto and finesse and as usual, a complete lack of decorum and civility. Thanks to modcat and girlboy for letting us troll on each other for 34 wonderful pages. Sooner or later the government will return you to your regularly scheduled broadcast of absolute nonsense... so until next time... keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars... whatever the hell that means casey kasem... Offline
Posts: 729
Quote: The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down, those people's premiums went up because their policies were incomplete. And considering that only ~16 million americans are even effected by that and 60% of those will qualify for subsidies, and all of those people could get MUCH lower rates by participating in a group buying program like the exchanges, it IS wildly exaggerated. Even your article explains all of that, yet you can't get off that talking point. You proved yourself wrong and still won't admit you're wrong. You are really going to ignore deductibles skyrocketing and still act like the cost is going down? Oh, don't let this thread get closed!
At least, not until the government opens up and brings us more reason to hate on each other! YouTube Video Placeholder
Fumiku said: » Quote: The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down, those people's premiums went up because their policies were incomplete. And considering that only ~16 million americans are even effected by that and 60% of those will qualify for subsidies, and all of those people could get MUCH lower rates by participating in a group buying program like the exchanges, it IS wildly exaggerated. Even your article explains all of that, yet you can't get off that talking point. You proved yourself wrong and still won't admit you're wrong. You are really going to ignore deductibles skyrocketing and still act like the cost is going down? Different plans have different deductibles. The only data I have seen on it is apples to oranges. If there's some actual credible information on it, I never deny or ignore it. He keeps hammering on about premiums, which are also apples to oranges. Let the market stabilize, then we can talk about cost actually changing. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people It's been a whole 10 days since the system went live, forgive me if I don't think the sky is tumbling from the celestial heavens just yet. Odin.Jassik said: » Fumiku said: » Quote: The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down, those people's premiums went up because their policies were incomplete. And considering that only ~16 million americans are even effected by that and 60% of those will qualify for subsidies, and all of those people could get MUCH lower rates by participating in a group buying program like the exchanges, it IS wildly exaggerated. Even your article explains all of that, yet you can't get off that talking point. You proved yourself wrong and still won't admit you're wrong. You are really going to ignore deductibles skyrocketing and still act like the cost is going down? Different plans have different deductibles. The only data I have seen on it is apples to oranges. If there's some actual credible information on it, I never deny or ignore it. He keeps hammering on about premiums, which are also apples to oranges. Let the market stabilize, then we can talk about cost actually changing. Your original claim was that libertarians were 'wildly exaggerating individual cost'. Premium increases would fall under that umbrella. When Obama says you can keep your plan and it will be cheaper, then your plan is changed to conform to the new regs and is thus more expensive by 1800 dollars: A) you can't keep your plan. B) the premium has skyrocketed. You can't discredit those points under the attage of "apples to oranges" because the original plan (which is no longer lawfully compliant) no longer exists. There are no more apples, there are now ONLY oranges. Nor can you point out that if they participant simply didn't participate in healthcare, he'd only have to pay a fine of ~90 bucks (even though it would surely decrease his individual cost, amirite?). Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people It's been a whole 10 days since the system went live, forgive me if I don't think the sky is tumbling from the celestial heavens just yet. Also, the sequester has been ongoing for 8 months and 10 days. Sky still hasn't fallen, earth hasn't imploded, people haven't spontaneously incinerated yet. Dogs love cats though, can't explain that though. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people It's been a whole 10 days since the system went live, forgive me if I don't think the sky is tumbling from the celestial heavens just yet. Also, the sequester has been ongoing for 8 months and 10 days. Sky still hasn't fallen, earth hasn't imploded, people haven't spontaneously incinerated yet. Dogs love cats though, can't explain that though. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people It's been a whole 10 days since the system went live, forgive me if I don't think the sky is tumbling from the celestial heavens just yet. Also, the sequester has been ongoing for 8 months and 10 days. Sky still hasn't fallen, earth hasn't imploded, people haven't spontaneously incinerated yet. Dogs love cats though, can't explain that though. False equivalence much? The sequester is slow burning whereas the rollout of Obamacare is like any major launch in that the first few weeks/months will suck before things stabilize. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people It's been a whole 10 days since the system went live, forgive me if I don't think the sky is tumbling from the celestial heavens just yet. Also, the sequester has been ongoing for 8 months and 10 days. Sky still hasn't fallen, earth hasn't imploded, people haven't spontaneously incinerated yet. Dogs love cats though, can't explain that though. Yes, it sucks that it happened, but harping on it will not help your message any. There are millions of faults with the Obama Administration, it is just time to go to the next fault, like instead of trying to negotiate with Congress about the shutdown, the Obama Administration instead is planning on giving additional money to Egypt... Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » False equivalence much? The sequester is slow burning whereas the rollout of Obamacare is like any major launch in that the first few weeks/months will suck before things stabilize. I'm waiting until the bill comes due when we will all see Obamacare for what it really is. Higher overall costs for less benefits. Exactly opposite as to what the bill is supposed to be! Edit: Also, there hasn't been any effect on day-to-day activity, now has there? I saw 200 people were arrested in that pro immigration rally, including several sitting Congressman, but in Nausi's world, thats "allowing."
When in doubt, use military vets to enhance your argument.
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Odin.Jassik said: » Fumiku said: » Quote: The VAST majority of purchasers premiums WILL go down, those people's premiums went up because their policies were incomplete. And considering that only ~16 million americans are even effected by that and 60% of those will qualify for subsidies, and all of those people could get MUCH lower rates by participating in a group buying program like the exchanges, it IS wildly exaggerated. Even your article explains all of that, yet you can't get off that talking point. You proved yourself wrong and still won't admit you're wrong. You are really going to ignore deductibles skyrocketing and still act like the cost is going down? Different plans have different deductibles. The only data I have seen on it is apples to oranges. If thvere's some actual credible information on it, I never deny or ignore it. He keeps hammering on about premiums, which are also apples to oranges. Let the market stabilize, then we can talk about cost actually changing. Your original claim was that libertarians were 'wildly exaggerating individual cost'. Premium increases would fall under that umbrella. When Obama says you can keep your plan and it will be cheaper, then your plan is changed to conform to the new regs and is thus more expensive by 1800 dollars: A) you can't keep your plan. B) the premium has skyrocketed. You can't discredit those points under the attage of "apples to oranges" because the original plan (which is no longer lawfully compliant) no longer exists. There are no more apples, there are now ONLY oranges. Nor can you point out that if they participant simply didn't participate in healthcare, he'd only have to ppay a fine of ~90 bucks (even though it would surely decrease his individual cost, amirite?). you can keep your plan wasn't the end of his sentence, it still had to conform to federal regulations. so their premium changed because their plan changed. that is a different conversation. i don't agree with the plans being forced to change, they should have had a grace period with the exchanges open before forcing existing policies to.be changed. but it's a temporary problem for a very small part of the population, not the universal doomsday we keep hearing about. Asura.Kingnobody said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Asura.Kingnobody said: » Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I don't pretend to give a sh!t about those sob stories I post. I post them to expose they outright fabrication that the proposed "government" led system: A) produces higher quality B) is less expensive C) is more convenient to use D) is more concerned with caring for the people |
||
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|