mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

Over the last couple of weeks, Congress has been in a budget battle. According to many polls taken in this Country, depending on which source you really believe, a large majority of American people want the Affordable Care Act(ACA), also known as Obamacare, to be repealed. A humorous side note is that when you call it ACA fewer people want it repealed than when it is called Obamacare.

In the last couple of budget v**es in the House, the v**e, of course along party lines, was:
1) Defund ACA
2) Delay the individual mandate
3) Make Congress and their staffers not exempt from ACA
(those are the ones I recall and to me are the most important)
Of course, no one believed that the first one would even get consideration, but in the end it did and was v**ed down easily by the Democrat majority Senate.

Then the House Republicans said, "Ok, if you still will not get rid of it, then let us delay the individual mandate for one year like most of the rest of the ACA has been delayed." Of course, no changes to ACA are allowed by the Republicans, so the Democrat Majority Senate rejected that budget.

Then the House Republicans got even more creative, they said, "Ok, if you want this thing, then you should have to abide by it just like the people you have forced it upon." Well, last night's v**e along party lines proves, at least to me, and should prove to even the most hard-nosed Democrat v**er, that the Democrats believe themselves to be above the laws they enact.

Another side note, the United States Government, the employer of the members of Congress and their staffers, have their insurance opportunities provided by their employer through private insurance companies. According to ACA, if your employer provides private insurance you are not required to go to the HealthCare Exchanges to obtain your insurance. As the Federal Employees Unions would never allow a renegotiation of their contracts to allow the Federal Government to not provide private insurance opportunities, those members of Congress and their staffers would never be subjected to the requirements and mandates of ACA. By passing the budget as amended, no one in Congress would really be effected and the Federal Government would not be "shut down". But I believe the fear of the Federal Government dropping their private insurance opportunities prevented them from faking out the American people. So I have to ask, "Why did they reject the second budget proposal?"

There have been many debates on this forum, and I am sure on others regarding this topic. I have been and always will remain a believer that the members of Congress and their staffers are OUR employees, not we their subjects, and should be forced to abide by the laws they enact. Last night was just more proof, in my mind, of the disconnect between many of our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES and ourselves.

Do the members of the Senate who v**ed against the budget believe themselves above the people?
Do the members of the Senate who v**ed against the budget believe themselves above the laws they write and enact?
Do the members of the Senate who v**ed against the budget because it touches upon and possibly damages the credibility of legislation they have been trying to put through for decades?
Do the members of the Senate who v**ed against the budget reject the bill out of spite? To tell the Republicans in the House that, regardless the will of the people or the Congress(wo)men, they are so much more important?

When is the madness going to end? When will the American people finally stand up for their Constitutional Rights and tell these ELECTED Representatives they are our servants. The calling was to be a public servant in an elected capacity, but they seem to believe that we need to be their servant and can be treated as less than they.

Before anyone calls me a sycophant for the Republican party and Conservative ideals, while it was not mentioned directly, they are as much at fault for this crap as the Democrats.

The House Republicans have had at least a year to come up with, and pass, a budget. They have procrastinated. They caused the delays that have led to the current situation.

Why is it that the budget battle, which should be the first item of business in any new Congress, is the last item of business? The budget for the next year should be ironed out before any other of the bullcrap that Congress puts first in its agenda. But, no, regardless who controls the House, they do not want to do their jobs the way they should be done until it is the last minute because they want to politicize the budget fight, unless one party or another controls both sides of the Legislature.

joe1941

Excellent post!! :thumbup: :thumbup:

Artemis

I recall the summer, how everyone was on vacation, that's like when your house is on fire you go out to the backyard and have a BBQ

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

It seems I must correct myself before being called an outright liar. I just this morning learned that Congress and their staffers may not be exempt from the ACA. I have not validated the information, but am amending this thread to put forth the possibility I may have been wrong.

I do have to ask myself why they are asking for exemption.

the patriot Loc: Kentucky

Democrats are for the people?I have watched this battle closely and watched the house compromise and send back to the senate different proposals only to have the senate reject any and all of them. Reid and the senate are doing what Obama wants and that is to ignore the peoples wishes. These politicians have been in Washington for so long they think they can not be replaced, that they are above those that elected them. For the record I am not talking only about democrats, I did say politicians. The fact is that the uninformed people think that congress is only republicans and don't realize that the house is controlled by republicans, and the senate is controlled by democrats and the house and the senate together make up the congress. Find this hard to believe, just poll some people on your own, it will open your eyes to see just how uninformed a lot of people are. I have found that a lot of people are uneducated when it comes to government and how the government works. I listen to the so called experts,do my own research, and come to my own conclusions. I believe that the so called experts advise is what has put us where we are today, lots of book learning, no common sense. It would be wise of all the people to do the same and forget about party.

Artemis

As far as" Democrats believe themselves to be above the laws they enact" I think you have that backwards. The republicans tried to follow the process of repeal ACA/Obama Care and were turned down 41 times; I wouldn’t call that something being forced upon you. I would call that being ridiculously obstinate beyond reason a wasting the tax payers money in the process. Than the Republicans brought it to court declaring it unconstitutional and losing it at that end too, when it was declared within our constitutional rights; still at the cost of tax payers. Not to mention that the people v**ed for this by reelecting the President and a democratic senate. The republicans keep pushing their negative propaganda in the media hammering the people trying to change people’s minds with the negative narratives, which have been working.
Now after all this they are pushing it into not approving our government budget. They need to do their job and stop grand standing , approve our budget to pay our bills, and follow our governing process and realize that after 41 times they lost, and to do what the people want. There has not been one valid point against the ACA, because it is all negative assumption. We have to actually use it and then literally see what the outcome will bring, and improve on it, change it or what ever needs to be done at that time.

Humera has had a 35 Billion dollar profits, this is after all their expenses which includes outrageous payrolls, meanwhile people our losing their homes, are in major debt in order to be able to get treatment, that's a problem a very BIG problem. When we have profit making enterprises for our health care, it is not in our interest, it is in theirs, we are the losing end no matter what.

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

As I find the majority of this post irrelevant, I will only address this last paragraph.

What does it matter the profit of any company, regardless of the products or services it provides? What was the profit margin that garnered that $35B? People like you want to complain when Exxon makes $15B dollars in profit and call it outrageous without realizing their profit margin was only 3%, but say nothing when McDonald's earns $10B in profit and it is ~20% profit margin. A person, or group of people, go into business with the intent to make money. If they do not make money, or at least break even, what is the point of making the attempt to go into business. Many businesses fail, many businesses succeed. Why should there be complaint when they succeed? Why is the amount of money they make and pay taxes on any concern of anyone's except those who make the initial monetary investment?

Are you jealous of those who make a lot of money for their abilities and get paid for it? Why are their payrolls outrageous to you? Do you think everyone should make minimum wage and that is it? Do people not deserve to be paid for their worth to the company? You appear to me, and this is only speculation on my part, to be someone who believes they should be paid what everyone else gets paid with the same job title even if you do not do the same amount of work as the others.

And this is all the fault of the profit makers in the world? What about their own responsibility? Did they buy a house they could not afford? Were they one of the beneficiaries of Bill Clinton's policy to force banks and mortgage lenders to give mortgages to people who could not afford them. That is what caused the housing crises and everyone knows it. Personal responsibility, which you seem to not advocate, had no small part in the facts behind why they are losing their homes?

So none of these people were in major debt before they required treatment? How many of those people you are putting into this category did not have insurance because they did not think they needed it?

But it is a problem not caused completely by politicians and business, large or small. Again, I refer you to personal responsibility.

And again I say, why should someone not be able to invest and not get a return on investment. That is called interest free loans, try to get a bank to do that for you.

Why should non-investor interests be taken into consideration when it comes to investments and return on those investments. You do know that investing is not a form of money-lending, but a form of gambling. Why gamble if there is no chance of getting anything in return? Investment is what drives business. Investment is what drives the economy. Businesses, small and large, medical and non-medical, are games of chance that provide goods or services to consumers who are income earners or the l***hes, good or bad ones, on those income earners.

Let me ask you this: why is it that those who produce or provide a service taxed? Why are they the only ones who pay income taxes? The simple answer is that they earn? Your opinion on how much they earn, outrageous or not, should have not bearing on anything. Some of those earners pay no income tax. Why are the earners being punished for earning? That is exactly what an income tax is. A punishment for trying to provide for yourself and/or your family. Those who do not earn, or are exempted because they do not make "enough" are not taxed. And many have "income". Just not the kind that requires one to work to get the income.

Of course it is, they are the investors. Why should it not be all about them?

Who is the we you are talking about? The company I work for makes money, I get paid I am happy. They pay me what they believe I am worth. I have no dispute with what I am paid, that was true until the economy tanked and I took a 20% pay cut to be able to keep working for them. It is a small business. Because of the economy, our sales people have to go outside the United States to find work for us. We have to rely on countries with recovering economies to keep us afloat. It is the policies of this administration and legislature that is keeping the economy down. When my company makes a profit, I am glad that I had some small part in our company earning that profit. The owners of my company deserve to be paid back, "with interest", for their initial investments as long as they can keep the company running. Why is that a problem for you?

Cry all you want about profit. Cry all you want about high payrolls. When you have the money to start a business, you will want the same thing: a return on investment. Or at least a business that is break even. You will want people to pay as much for your product or service as the market will bear. Deny it!!! Of course, and this again is my speculation, will blame anyone else, probably Republicans, if your business goes under. It cannot be your fault, right?

joe1941

Great counterpoints!! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

emarine

When we lost our people in 911 that was a national tragedy...We loose 10 fold that every year because health care is too costly for some.... That is also a national tragedy...

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

Unfortunately, we cannot save everyone. And this is coming from a person with a cong*****l, meaning I was born with it, heart defect that eventually will put me on a t***splant list. Do not try to push that sympathetic crap on me. Someone has to die for me to live. And everyone who receives a vital organ t***splant knows someone died so they could live.

It matters not how they died, only how they lived and only to those who knew them. How many people die every day because of the current medical system, who could afford it. Even today we have crappy people in the medical system treating patients. Now think of what is going to happen to the medical standards once ACA is in full swing. As it is speculation, I am calling it that, but that does not change what can and probably will happen.

We have situations in this country where we have children k*****g children every day and I see no one outside of Chicago crying over it. But let a Sandy Hook happen and the world as we know it has to end and it has to be changed "for the better".

Artemis

Are you the I got mine, screw you persona? It is HEALTH CARE, peoples lives over money. It is staggering how you don't acknowledge the difference between a product, service and people. That's your sign right there my friend.You must be in a protective security bubble and cannot relate to what other people go through, you haven't a clue. Do you have your investments and portfolios, are you blind to the anguish of the people who have worked hard all their lives and go into debt by trying to stay alive or care for a loved one. When I say "we" it is the entire country because when health care is for profit, the people are not being considered first, it's making sure the inverters like you get paid. It is always the people sitting comfortable that b***h about regular people having something descent and basic like good health care, it is truly amazing.
In much of your post I agreed with, and I understand the need for profit. But health care and profit is a clear conflict of interest. It is the same as a home repairer being your home surveyor.
I do not resent people who make a lot of money,I am comfortable, happy and grateful with my life.I know what is important. I have seen what happens to people, with not just a broken leg to repair, but a terminal illness, and the financial devastation it can reel, and this is up close and personal and with family and friends who have also been well off. We have a problem in health care, and it has stayed on the back burner long enough. We need to implement something, in order to have a starting place and than make the needed changes along the way. The ACA not only allows people to afford insurance, its greatest benefit is for all the people who can't get insurance because of a precondition, as with a newborn with a heart condition. Or not having a cap, allowing your treatments to not come to an abrupt halt.

snowbear37 Loc: MA.

I have been saying for years that "modern politicians" are in it for the money and power (in that order). Yes, they do think they are above the laws they enact for "everyone else". It's not just the Senate, it's the House, also. These politicians do not want to give up the "lifestyle" they have grown accustomed to (the ones that have made a "career" out of it). They should have to abide by every law they enact and the "perks" and retirement benefits should be based on how many years they "served", lobbyists should be made illegal, and they should have to "work" 5 days a week, every week, they should also not be able to "v**e themselves any raises in pay. Until some of these things come to pass, nothing will change. They think they're smarter than everyone else and know what is best for everyone else (no matter what "the people" say). I don't include all politicians in Congress in this opinion, but certainly the majority of them. They have truly forgotten that they were supposed to "serve the people", not the other way around.

mmccarty12 Loc: Zionsville, Indiana

In a way, yes. I worked hard all my life and no one ever GAVE to me or cared one whit about me. When I was first diagnosed with my problem, I was working as a fast food worker making $7.65 an hour plus tips. I paid $98 a month for the part-time insurance offered through the company. My hospital stay was $12,000 dollars for three days of care. My insurance company paid out $1200 of that $12000. I was responsible for the balance. No one helped me pay that off, no one cared that my bill was $12000 and was concerned about how I was going to have to pay for it. Again, do not try to push the sympathy card on someone who during a time of need needed sympathy and got it from no one.

So just because it is health care it should be free to all. Who is going to pay the cost? Someone has to pay the cost. I again refer you to the above. I had to make serious sacrifices in my life after my diagnosis to be able to pay that bill. Social Services was not there to help me. I am male and white. Now, because someone else has no insurance, I am expected to pay for their healthcare in the current system. It is caused because of higher prices on that healthcare due to the ones who "CANNOT" pay that the prices are higher. Not because the administrators of the medical systems are just being assholes.

In any industry, you have the producers and the consumers. They co-exist. Without consumers, you have no producers. Without producers, there is nothing to consume.

Your self-righteous will in no way sway me to your cause. I have been through more than you know and yet you think I should sympathize with someone who has it harder than me. Where are those who have it better than me doing their best to sympathize with me. You get out of life what you put into it. I have worked hard for what I have and I am tired of sympathetic losers like yourself who want to help the world take from me what I have earned just because I have more than another.

I was one of those who had no investments. I struggled and lived paycheck to paycheck for years. I finally decided to take a stand, knowing no one was going to help me unless I helped myself. I took advantage of what was available to me to help me out of my situation, and believe you me there was very little of it, and I pulled myself upward. I want to stay here and I sure as hell do not want to be punished because I did so.

If it was not for those investors, there would not be that hospital for people to go to. You cannot have it both ways. The expectation of private monies funding hospitals, unless they are charity hospital, and no return on investment is naive at best and stupidity at its worst. When you take away the possibility of a return on investment, you take away the desire for investment. They go hand in hand. If you want all hospitals to be run as charities, talk to the Kennedy's, Gates', Rockefellers', Vanderbilt's, Carnegie's. They are the ones who can afford it, but my $55K a year salary should be mine to keep unless I want to donate it.

As one of those regular people who pulled himself up the ladder to a higher financial status, I take umbrage at this comment. Once again, you want to punish me for my success. You are not deserving of anything from me or others like me. If you want to be so charitable, be charitable, but do not make demands of others. Not everyone believes as you do and nor is there any requirement to do so.


I disagree, and will continue to do so.

If you are dumb enough to hire the same person to determine the damage to your home and do the repairs, you deserve what you get.

I am happy with my financial lot in life and want to do with those finances what I want to do with them. That includes deciding how I invest my money. It does not include being forced to give it up to someone I have not determined deserving of it because I have more than they.

As have we all. You still seem to think you can save the world. Alright, Superhero, go ahead and try, but do not demand any help from me.

I do not believe I denied that. You are right, there is a problem. Too many people think they can receive treatment and do not have to pay for it. That is what drives up medical costs. Is the hospital supposed to just eat that cost? If that were the case, no one would pay for any medical treatments and the hospital would eventually go bankrupt. How well does that sit with you. When a hospital does not make money, investors drop out, there is no capital with which to operate and the hospital shuts down. How much medical treatment will anyone, rich or poor, receive at that point?

Why? No one has given me what I would view as a valid reason that the Federal Government needs to be involved. Especially since those in the Government are taking great strides to be exempt from the same laws. I believe the Republicans have it right when they oppose the ACA and say they want themselves and their staffers to be exempt.

I love how people like you look only at the short-term and do not even think to look forward and view what this program will eventually do to the insurance industry. Consider the number of healthy people who are not going to want to go onto the exchanges and will be more willing to pay the $95 a year penalty for not having insurance, instead of paying $100 a month in insurance premiums they may not use. Then, when they have a serious injury, they have no insurance. Now they are going to have a large medical bill. More than likely they will default on the payment of that bill and the hospital will have to eat that cost, in your little world. Eventually, that cost will be paid, by insurance companies. Eventually rates will go up on those who are covered to cover the cost of those who are not and do not want to be because it is cheaper for them not to be. Consider, also, the number of people who do not have to file income tax forms because there is no need because they fit into the criteria that precludes their need to do so, not everyone has to file a tax return. Those people, according to current laws, will not even have to pay the penalty if they have no insurance. Or, let us make this worse, assume ACA eventually requires all people of a certain age to file an income tax return even if they would not be required to do so under the normal tax laws. If those people have no taxed income, and therefore no taxes paid and no insurance, they will be liable for the no insurance tax penalty. Now they are in arrears to the IRS and we all know the tactics they use to collect monies due.

Now you want to drive insurance companies out of business. You know who pays after that? The Government. Eventually, that is what is the ultimate goal of this thing.

Call it paranoia if you want, but if it turns out to be true, who is the smarter one?

One other thing, would you be so kind as to do the readers of your posts and the English language a favor? When writing, it is considered good practice to separate different topics in a long post into separate paragraphs. It is irritating to try to read another's writings and try to figure out where one topic begins and another ends.

Theimpeacher

If democrats were for the people, then why was Obama elected? He represents nothing but bad and wrong for this country and everyone in it. He's shady. Crooked. Arrogant. Non-American. Holds hatred for this country. Sets out to divide color, religion, and country. Empty policies. Steals and abuses our system. Supports laziness. Overspends on vacations. Greedy. Selfish. Crude. Rude. Supports Islam. Sends U.S. Monies to support other countries...like Africa. Supports his Arab father and brother who are Islamic radicals in Kenya that go round k*****g non-Muslims, which Obama sends millions to support their movement. Pushing an Islamic STAMP through our American postal services....pink several layers of beveled leafed flower. Please STOP this from happening. If you buy this stamp, your approving Islamic beliefs...and then, WHAT'S NEXT? Obama is wrong for our country. Mplease don't wait till it slaps you in your face before you wake up...it'll be too late.

Theimpeacher

The BIBLE speaks of a strong, influential and political personality that would have a great following like no other that will rule and be known as the ANTI-CHRIST. Doesn't Obama sound like he's paving the way for the devil? He may not be the anti-christ but, you can believe he's performing his role to assist the devils forthcoming into this world.