Government Shutdown 2013-2014 My Civil Servant Brethern...what you think

[rico x hood]

Social security is not enough to live on, it'll still be around, but you need to fund your own retirement. Same thing with your health care right now.

Oh no doubt, I do the maximum amount for my 401K because my employer matches and I also take a advantage of my companies Employee Stock discount program, in edition to my own personal savings. I'm not about to spend my golden years living in paycheck to paycheck, I had enough of that in my teenage years

 

[ninjahood]

 

 
once democrats caved to ben nelson (a blue dog conservative democrat who was mauled

in da 2010 GOP sweep) to remove da public option in obamacare, it turned da bill into a big stinker...

Ben Nelson wasn't voted out in 2010. He retired from the Senate in January.

he didn't seek relection because their were LONG knives for him from both directions.

 

[djyoung08]

Ok, I haven't been keeping with this because I don't think I'm affected. But is welfare, SS checks, food stamps, unemployment or any other government aid being affected by all this as of now?

Im also curious about this...

 

[rico x hood]

And THANKS to Obamacare, healthy young adults up to age 26 can be covered under their Parent's insurance!

Tell me how that is a bad thing?

It's not a bad thing at all. A large group of my friends take advantage of that benefit. However one good benefit in cluster **** on numerous other regulations red tape, and economical uncertainty, not to mention on the infringement on civil liberties does not make it worthwhile at all in my opinion.

 

[rillo561]

Oh no doubt, I do the maximum amount for my 401K because my employer matches and I also take a advantage of my companies Employee Stock discount program, in edition to my own personal savings. I'm not about to spend my golden years living in paycheck to paycheck, I had enough of that in my teenage years

That's good, but there's a huge section of this country that doesn't have these type of benefits. You never know what can happen in the market, in the crash of '08 401k's took a hit and people had to prolong there retirement plans. My mother being one of them.

 

[ninjahood]

Also, if the public option was still there, do you honestly believe the GOP/tea party would be fine with that? Give me a break.

democrats have only themselves for removing it.

they wanted canada style heathcare? that was da da nugget they needed.

its no secret people on da left are also unhappy with obamacare because it doesn't go far enough..da way it is right now its a timebomb, and they

know it, hence all those waivers given out.

 

[rillo561]

democrats have only themselves for removing it.

they wanted canada style heathcare? that was da da nugget they needed.

its no secret people on da left are also unhappy with obamacare because it doesn't go far enough..da way it is right now its a timebomb, and they

know it, hence all those waivers given out.

I agree it was a huge disappointment that the public option was taken out. However ACA is a step in a better direction than the old system. I already know you want it to fail NH so there's really no point of beating a dead horse with you.

I don't know enough about the waivers to comment.

 

[rico x hood]

By waivers he is talking about the delays and exemptions that businesses and certain special interests are getting from having to implement Obamacare. The same kind of delay the Dems rejected for individuals.

 

[rillo561]

By waivers he is talking about the delays and exemptions that businesses and certain special interests are getting from having to implement Obamacare. The same kind of delay the Dems rejected for individuals.

So only democratic supported business got the waiver? People can't delay an illness so delaying it for "real" people would be ridiculous. Corporations can't get sick, lose their job or be foreclosed on.

 

[ninjahood]

 

By waivers he is talking about the delays and exemptions that businesses and certain special interests are getting from having to implement Obamacare. The same kind of delay the Dems rejected for individuals.

So only democratic supported business got the waiver? People can't delay an illness so delaying it for "real" people would be ridiculous. Corporations can't get sick, lose their job or be foreclosed on.

umm unions got waivers too...so did congress.
[h1]White House delays employer mandate requirement until 2015[/h1]
By Sarah Kliff, Published: July 2 at 5:51 pmE-mail the writer

1380

Comments

More

The Obama administration will not penalize businesses that do not provide health insurance in 2014, the Treasury Department announced Tuesday.

Instead, it will delay enforcement of a major Affordable Care Act requirement that all employers with more than 50 employees provide coverage to their workers until 2015.


(Photo by Jessica Rinaldi/Reuters)

The administration said it would postpone the provision after hearing significant concerns from employers about the challenges of implementing it.

"We have heard concerns about the complexity of the requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively," Mark Mazur, Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, wrote in a late Tuesday blog post. "We recognize that the vast majority of businesses that will need to do this reporting already provide health insurance to their workers, and we want to make sure it is easy for others to do so."

The Affordable Care Act requires all employers with more than 50 full-time workers provide health insurance or pay steep fines. That policy had raised concerns about companies downsizing their workforce or cutting workers' hours in order to dodge the new mandate.

In delaying the enforcement of that rule, the White House sidesteps those challenges for one year. It is also the second significant interruption for the Affordable Care Act, following a one-year delay on key functions of the small business insurance marketplaces.

Together, the moves could draw criticism that the administration will not be able to put into effect its signature legislative accomplishment on schedule.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...lays-employer-mandate-requirement-until-2015/

 

[andycrazn]

Social security is not enough to live on, it'll still be around, but you need to fund your own retirement. Same thing with your health care right now.

Oh no doubt, I do the maximum amount for my 401K because my employer matches and I also take a advantage of my companies Employee Stock discount program, in edition to my own personal savings. I'm not about to spend my golden years living in paycheck to paycheck, I had enough of that in my teenage years

401k is a suckers game. Inflation, 401k maintenance fees, bubbles bursting, possibility it might be "cyprused" is the reason I took the hit on my 401k just to get my money back.

These same mutha****as *****ing about how they can't afford it will spend their monthly premium at the bar in a week, or doing some other irresponsible ****.

People are acting like insurance is some material possession or they live in a bubble immune to disease and injury.

When these same young adults go to the ER, us "older adults" are the ones paying for you. Why is it ok for us to pay for you, yet you can't pay for yourself?

It all boils down to freedom my dude.

A lot of people don't like the feeling of not having freedom(s).

freedom a choice. To make stupid decisions as well. Take that away from an individual and they arent truly free.

 

[011781]

It all boils down to freedom my dude.

A lot of people don't like the feeling of not having freedom(s).

Like I've said before, if you work you pay taxes.

If you buy things, you pay taxes.

If you want to walk around on these streets, you must have identification.

There are a lot of things the government "forces" us to do.

People are picking and choosing when to exercise their "freedoms".

I bet if the policy of the hospitals was insurance or cash-before-treatment only a lot of these ****** would be singing a different tune. Get in a car wreck, the paramedics are checking for insurance first. No insurance, better have a credit card or enough cash to cover it. If not, welp, your *** is getting left in the middle of the street to die.

 

[011781]

We're already paying for you old folks social security benefits. So when you retire at 65 or whenever those nice little checks you get will be because my generation are working. As far as I'm concerned we do enough for you guys. I can only hope that social security is at least halfway solvent by the time I reach the age of retirement...in 40+ years.

This is the silliest **** I've read in the thread.

 

[andycrazn]

We're already paying for you old folks social security benefits. So when you retire at 65 or whenever those nice little checks you get will be because my generation are working. As far as I'm concerned we do enough for you guys. I can only hope that social security is at least halfway solvent by the time I reach the age of retirement...in 40+ years.

This is the silliest **** I've read in the thread.

he is right though. Social security relies on a bigger workforce than the last to compensate the receivers of SSI to keep it solvent. But with ZIRP killing their ROI on treasuries they are insolvent now.

 

[rillo561]

So they got their waiver to delay it because corporation finances are more complex than the average Joe. I've also read it gives corporations time to bring up their"bare bone" coverage up to what's being offered in these exchanges.

 

[oidreez]

We're already paying for you old folks social security benefits. So when you retire at 65 or whenever those nice little checks you get will be because my generation are working. As far as I'm concerned we do enough for you guys. I can only hope that social security is at least halfway solvent by the time I reach the age of retirement...in 40+ years.

This is the silliest **** I've read in the thread.

how is it silly when it's true though? You assume every young person is squandering their money at the bar. How about the ones living at home to pay back their student loans?

 

[011781]

Speaking of "freedoms". 

Isn't our freedom being violated by the GOP right now?

The American people voted for the guy who was pushing Obamacare. He won, and won convincingly.

Now the losing side wants to tell the American people that they made the wrong decision, and until they're mistake is fixed they're going to stop paying you.

 

[rillo561]

how is it silly when it's true though? You assume every young person is squandering their money at the bar. How about the ones living at home to pay back their student loans?

They are paying student loans and paying for SS. I don't see a problem.

 

[rillo561]

Speaking of "freedoms". 

Isn't our freedom being violated by the GOP right now?

The American people voted for the guy who was pushing Obamacare. He won, and won convincingly.

Now the losing side wants to tell the American people that they made the wrong decision, and until they're mistake is fixed they're going to stop paying you.

What kills me is that they don't have an alternative other than "no"

 

[011781]

how is it silly when it's true though? You assume every young person is squandering their money at the bar. How about the ones living at home to pay back their student loans?

1. I didn't assume anything. I obviously don't think every "young person" does that. Cmon man.

2. It silly because he's acting like his age group is carrying the older crowd on their backs. Like older people just sit around collecting from the blood, sweat, and tears of "kids".

Wouldn't it make sense that older people make more, therefore pay more in taxes, have put more money into social security because they've been working longer, and spend more than younger people because they have more income and financial responsibilities accumulated over time? I'm no finance major by any means, so I could be totally wrong, but it makes sense to me.

 

[8tothe24]

Like I've said before, if you work you pay taxes.

If you buy things, you pay taxes.

If you want to walk around on these streets, you must have identification.

There are a lot of things the government "forces" us to do.

People are picking and choosing when to exercise their "freedoms".

I bet if the policy of the hospitals was insurance or cash-before-treatment only a lot of these ****** would be singing a different tune. Get in a car wreck, the paramedics are checking for insurance first. No insurance, better have a credit card or enough cash to cover it. If not, welp, your *** is getting left in the middle of the street to die.

Really now?

What if you live in a State where there is no sales tax, you don't pay taxes on those goods.

If everyone must have an identification to walk on the streets, why are the democrats so against identification verification at voting booths?

There is a daisy chain affect of this law, that will affect your freedoms. Especially as the people who wrote this thing wanted it to direct us to a single-payer system (from their mouths) which will result in the loss of freedom to choose what is best for us and being told what is best for us. Then you factor in the increased IRS presence, enforcement of random nickle and diming aspects, taxes on "Cadillac plans" (that won't adjust for inflation), etc. And the multitude of other unforeseen financial affects that will result from this (the only other examples we can point to is every other government run program and the increased funding required to maintain these programs).

Whenever the federal government assumes governance over an aspect of your life, you have lost some freedom by definition.

And I bet if an asteroid was coming straight at Earth right now, no one would give a flying F... ... if we want to talk hypothetical situations and all.

Speaking of "freedoms".



Isn't our freedom being violated by the GOP right now?



The American people voted for the guy who was pushing Obamacare. He won, and won convincingly.



Now the losing side wants to tell the American people that they made the wrong decision, and until they're mistake is fixed they're going to stop paying you.

Everyone that voted for Obama supports Obamacare... I would love for you to prove this one.

 

[emceehammered]

 

 I don't believe it.

Do your own research so that you can form your own opinion. Look up Comet Ison.

 

[rico x hood]

1. I didn't assume anything. I obviously don't think every "young person" does that. Cmon man.

2. It silly because he's acting like his age group is carrying the older crowd on their backs. Like older people just sit around collecting from the blood, sweat, and tears of "kids".

Wouldn't it make sense that older people make more, therefore pay more in taxes, have put more money into social security because they've been working longer, and spend more than younger people because they have more income and financial responsibilities accumulated over time? I'm no finance major by any means, so I could be totally wrong, but it makes sense to me.

Well yes, you are wrong. The baby boomer generation retired and there is a whole lot of them. They have stretched SS to the brink, so in order for them and other soon to be retirees to get the money back that they have been paying for a lifetime, the money that I am putting in is going to them. So yes we are carrying the older generation on our backs and they are benefiting from the blood, sweat, and tears of my generation of workers. If for some reason we decided to not work SS would run out. These are the facts.

 

[RustyShackleford]

-No one is required to have ID when walking the streets.

-The government got involved in slavery. White plantation owner lost the right to own slaves, a lost some freedom by definition right. See how that logic can get turned against you B

Matter of fact why aren't I free to murder who I want, to rape who i want, why do I gotta stop at traffic lights, why I gotta pay taxes, pay my rent, why can't I give golden showers to old ladies in the park, to burn kittens to death. Why don't I have freedom to do such things.

Oh what that you say, there are laws to prevent acts. Laws!? kinda like how Obamacare is a la.......w.............ohhhhhhhhhh.

 

[rillo561]

Democrats are against the voter id law, but are they playing games by shutting down the government? Why was OK to vote without an ID before this President got elected?