America - The Official Thread

[Sanji Himura]

My mother actually lives in that district in question(Aledo). I can tell you that as one of the top five teams in the country, they relatively have the attitude that Football is king, and invest thousands of dollars of their own money to private camps to train their kid to shave .2 seconds off their 40. Whereas the other schools in the conference, mainly Fort Worth ISD, only has school practices and that's it. The results speak for themselves.

Makes me ashamed of my state's Interschoolastic League(Called UIL here). They create their conferences by population when they should have done it by gross median income.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I don't claim to know much about the pitfalls and benefits of the Affordable Care Act...nobody does. I'm not for it, because I have had health insurance for years; if I were someone without it, I'd probably support it. It's a matter of perspective, in that case. But I'm not going to talk about since it would be awfully ignorant to speak of something without having all the answers.

I will say that if the penalty is something like $20-50/year, I will consider it both a bad Democratic blind date, and the cheapest, most annoying Republican ex-girlfriend ever. After that, well...it probably won't be as much of a joke.

It's worse that $20-50 a year, especially when you read all of 1501, had to do a report on it so yeah...

 

[BobK]

The penalty is $95 in 2014, going up to $325 in 2015 and $695 in 2016. That's way out of the $20-$50 range.

Obama insisted this wasn't a tax, but the courts ruled it is, in fact, a tax. Which raises Constitutional questions about equal taxation (not that either administration this century has been overly concerned about Constitutionality).

It's the first time in history that the American public has been required to purchase a product unconditionally. Who knows where opening that gateway will lead.

It was billed as providing health care to millions of people currently uninsured. Turns out that most of those uninsured (young, healthy people) were uninsured by choice, or had only catastrophic coverage.

We were told we could keep our current insurance if we chose, and our current doctors. The first is already turning out to have been false, and all indications are that the second won't hold up either.

Its very name, Affordable Care Act. is a misnomer. With stratospheric deductibles and premiums double or more current policies, it's anything but affordable.

I could go on and on about what's wrong with Obamacare but that'll do for starters.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

BobK has it right and sadly hasn't even shown the worse part (I think) which is how much a family would have to pay if they don't get with the PPACA.

 

[GTsail]

****
It was billed as providing health care to millions of people currently uninsured. Turns out that most of those uninsured (young, healthy people) were uninsured by choice, or had only catastrophic coverage.

BobK -
Do you remember where you saw your info on why most of the un-insured don't have health insurance coverage?

I seem to remember seeing an older study that said that most people didn't have health insurance because of its high cost or because they lost their job, and that only a very small percentage didn't have insurance because they didn't want it or felt that they would never need it. I think that this percentage was less than 5%.

Off to find the study........

According to this Urban Institute study:Why do People lack Health insurance? only 2% of the respondents said that they didn't want health insurance and didn't need it.

According to the study, the primary reasons that individuals don't have insurance are:
1) the cost is too high
2) Lost job and lost insurance
3) Lost eligibility for medicaid
4) Ineligible because of age or pre-existing conditions

With the first two reasons covering about 70% of those without insurance.

Respectfully,
GTsail

 

[Danoff]

According to the study, the primary reasons that individuals don't have insurance are:
1) the cost is too high
2) Lost job and lost insurance

#2 is the one that kills me. Your health insurance and your job are about as related as your car insurance and your job... as in... not at all. Why we insist that our employers provide us health insurance (and bill us for it) makes absolutely no sense until you look at the tax code.

I'd have preferred a law that made it illegal for companies to provide health insurance to their employees (even when billing them for it).

 

[Sanji Himura]

But that study more than likely compasses people of all ages. You also have to take into consideration that most of the employers who don't offer medical coverage can't afford it themselves for one reason or another.

To put it this way, let's say that small business A has an annual net income of $800,000 for its one store whereas Big Business B has an annual net income of $2.3 billion across its 2,300 stores across 25 states. The annual net income formulated as shown here as gross income minus employee salary and general cost of business maintenance without health care coverage benefits.

Now if you are Big Business B, you obviously have enough money to provide health coverage in a package deal that is both cost effective for that company and to the insurer because if the number of employees that Big Business B hires is growing at a substantial rate, not only would it benefit that company with a bigger discount, but it also benefits the insurer because of the bigger profits that they will get from the consumer.

Small Business A, on the other hand, can't afford to cover health insurance for its employees, so they get thrown to the exchanges.

What does that mean to you? Let's say that you are 26, in perfect health, and working at Small Business A at part time hours. That meant diddly squat before Obamacare because they have that mentality that nothing is going to go wrong with them, until that broken leg happens on I-35 in a car crash.

If you are 55, in somewhat decent shape and working at Big Business B at what used to be full time hours after they cut them to 29 hours a week, you are going to the exchanges whether you like it or not, or pay that outrageous tax.

 

[orimarc]

Has any group actually made a study of how "affordable" a system like the NHS would be in the US? As in, "We would need X millions from taxes. If there are Y million tax-payers, each one would have to pay Z dollars monthly to make the system work".

 

[Keef]

Has any group actually made a study of how "affordable" a system like the NHS would be in the US? As in, "We would need X millions from taxes. If there are Y million tax-payers, each one would have to pay Z dollars monthly to make the system work".

That would be a terrible idea. Mainly because we have a very large "baby boomer" generation born post-war who are all, say, 50-65, the majority of whom will be exiting the work force in the next decade, which means the system will lose tax revenue from the largest group of taxable workers, which means that the tax revenue from the relatively small amount of workers left will have to cover the tremendous insurance and welfare bills of the relatively large newly retired population and...it just won't work. Younger workers would have to be taxed so heavily to support them that everybody will be furious. Our Social Security system is already completely bankrupt and there's no way future revenues will be able to cover the expenses cost by these newly retired baby boomers.

There's no way to do it without raising taxes immensely and Americans will not stand for that. It's in Americans' DNA, even in the most blood-sucking Democrats, to ultimately provide for themselves and they will not stand to have the government take their earnings at such a rate.

 

[BobK]

BobK -
Do you remember where you saw your info on why most of the un-insured don't have health insurance coverage?

I seem to remember seeing an older study that said that most people didn't have health insurance because of its high cost or because they lost their job, and that only a very small percentage didn't have insurance because they didn't want it or felt that they would never need it. I think that this percentage was less than 5%.

Off to find the study........

According to this Urban Institute study:Why do People lack Health insurance? only 2% of the respondents said that they didn't want health insurance and didn't need it.

According to the study, the primary reasons that individuals don't have insurance are:
1) the cost is too high
2) Lost job and lost insurance
3) Lost eligibility for medicaid
4) Ineligible because of age or pre-existing conditions

With the first two reasons covering about 70% of those without insurance.

Respectfully,
GTsail

No, I'm afraid I can't find the article to back that particular statement up.

Not sure if this is relevant but the study you cited is from 2006, which was before anybody outside of Illinois had even heard of Obama, much less the ACA/Obamacare. Having said that, I wouldn't think the numbers would have changed greatly.

In any case, note that the number one reason is that the cost is too high. This could well mean "can't afford it" in the case of low-income families. but it also means "don't think it's cost-effective".

 

[Sanji Himura]

Also to put it another way, if it was unaffordable(or any of the same reasons) to roughly 77% of the uninsured adults in americans in 2006, just picture how much that percentage has grown because of Obamacare.

 

[Keef]

I want to change the system. It operates based on force, threat, punishment, etc. Everything that is a terrible way to get people to do what you want them to do, that's what the system uses. Even down to a parking ticket or front license plate. Those things don't keep people safe. Those are not crimes. There is no victim. Therefore they should be unenforceable. But that's how local governments, especially, make the money they need to keep the lights on in that fancy ass city hall, to employ too many people to do simple tasks, and to waste money on things like red light cameras which are then declared unconstitutional and are rendered nothing more than ominous reminders that the easiest way to make money is to do nothing but hold a gun to somebody's head and force them to make money for you.

I don't like it. It needs to be changed. That's why I'm not going to pay this front license plate fine that I got while my car was parked at a paid meter in Columbus. And when they put a hold on my car's registration I simply will forego registering it, ride dirty, possibly find a way to print a false registration sticker for my license plate, yada yada yada, end up in jail where the government will have to waste more of their money keeping me alive despite the fact that I never put a single person in danger with any of my actions.

 

[Keef]

 

[Blitz24]

Hello Carteret NJ, Staten Island, Bayonne, and oh yeah, New York City.

 

[Johnnypenso]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/12/us/philippines-typhoon-aid/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

America to the Rescue.

 

[Badasp5.0]

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/12/us/philippines-typhoon-aid/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

America to the Rescue.

Another reason why the US has a big military budget... All those ships and transports cost $$$$

 

[Keef]

Another reason why the US has a big military budget... All those ships and transports cost $$$$

I was thinking more along the lines of how the rest of the world likes to sit back and watch us do all the work.

 

[Badasp5.0]

I was thinking more along the lines of how the rest of the world likes to sit back and watch us do all the work.

Yep but OMG OMG American Imperialism OMG. Please help us with disaster relief.

 

[Keef]

I think the next time Germany tries to take over Europe which, let's be honest, could be any day now, we should just let them have at it. German immigrants built the America we have today anyway so we're basically family. Hell, my last name is Rosenkranz - I am family.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I think the next time Germany tries to take over Europe which, let's be honest, could be any day now, we should just let them have at it. German immigrants built the America we have today anyway so we're basically family. Hell, my last name is Rosenkranz - I am family.

I thought black slaves built America. Or was it forced Chinese labour? Or was it poor and desperate European immigrants? Guess it depends on who you talk to..

 

[Keef]

Black slaves were mainly from the South which could barely build railroad tracks. As a matter of fact, a main reason the North became so much more powerful economically than the South before the Civil War was because of heavy German immigration from the early 1800s up until the war. They brought with them their skills in trades like ironworks, machining, paper milling, glassworks, construction, crop rotation, labor unions, and of course beer brewing. I'd argue that without the heavy German influence the North would have languished and taken a century longer to develop its immense industrial economy. @Johnnypenso

 

[FoolKiller]

of course beer brewing. I'd argue that without the heavy German influence the North would have languished and taken a century longer to develop its immense industrial economy. @Johnnypenso

Hooray beer!!!

It fixes everything, even ugly women.

 

[Keef]

Hooray beer!!!

It fixes everything, even ugly women.

I watched a "documentary" called How Beer Saved the World on Netflix the other day. It was rather interesting.

 

[Adamgp]

Booze built America. Not just beer, but all kinds of alcohol.

 

[FoolKiller]

Booze built America. Not just beer, but all kinds of alcohol.

Every time we get drunk we stand on the shoulders of giants.

But remember, they didn't make that alcohol, we all did that.

 

[Sanji Himura]

A paper today is retreating from its stance that it took from 1863 that called President Lincoln's famous Gettysburg Address as silly, just in time for the 150th anniversary of the speech.

“In an editorial about President Abraham Lincoln’s speech delivered Nov. 19, 1863, in Gettysburg, the Patriot & Union failed to recognize its momentous importance, timeless eloquence, and lasting significance,” the paper wrote on its editorial page Thursday. “The Patriot-News regrets the error.”

Back in 1863, the Patriot-News of Central Penn. was known as Patriot Union. That paper was known as a "Copperhead" paper(a Copperhead was known as an anti-Civil War democrat at the time), and published the schathing remarks after Union troops arrested some of that paper's editorial board for suspicion of sedition the prior year. Add in the fact that next year was a presidential election, you have the makings of a potential bomb.

The story not only became the subject of redaction, but a 2,200 word article was published detailing the history surrounding the editorial.

 

[Keef]

It's upsetting to me that the paper retracted their original sentiment. @Sanji Himura

 

[FoolKiller]

OK, I saw this on The Daily Show and went out to get the clip.

President Obama takes blame for healthcare.gov issues.



Now, I am not going to go on about the Web site failures or what went wrong. Not the issue I have with this specific clip.

As a manager, I had two strict rules: 1) Never say, "It isn't my job," and 2) When you screw up never tell me, "I did my best," or, "I'm doing my best.

It's #2. If you fail to do your job correctly do not say it is your best. If your best is not doing your job then I should fire you because you can't do your job!

He says that he did not break his promise to get up and do his best.

Well, Mr President, if your best is a royal screw up, that even you admit to, then this isn't a job for you. Truth is, I don't think you touched the Web site, and it was delegated. But if you are taking the blame, and saying that's the best you could do, then find a new job.

 

[Keef]

So apparently the US's new war strategy is simply to fly so fast that we can break the rules of engagement before our foes can do anything about it. Because screw rules, right?

 

[Danoff]

Oh no, it goes so much further than that. Imagine for a moment that you have a fleet of 50 of those unmanned aircraft. You use them 9 times out of 10 for surveillance, but if you ever wanted to, you could strap a nuclear bomb onto all 50, and have them all in position over your enemy's return-strike capability and populated areas and release simultaneously.

They have no opportunity to fire back, the have no opportunity to respond to anything at all. Basically, you have the ultimate weapon for both information gathering and nation obliterating.

More often than nukes though, I imagine these would be used to deploy bunker busters or smart bombs for taking out specific targets. EMP is also an interesting concept for this.

The SR-71 never carried a payload. I bet these do.

Fun fact, the SR-71 encountered so much increased temperature at altitude - causing so much material expansion - that the aircraft didn't fit together on the ground. They built it to fit tightly at altitude, but on the ground it would leak fuel. They had to refuel it immediately after takeoff. That fuel combusted at so high a temperature/pressure that you could toss a lit match into a pool of it and it would put the match out.