More Obamacare fuckups

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I live in ~100 home neighborhood with two entrance points that is off the main drag of a highway. Nobody is home during the day for the most part and so we attract a lot of criminal activity because of the area we are located. You can pull off the highway get into the neighborhood and out in less then 2 minutes. I live in Maplewood MN specifically, where the average response time of police for a non-violent crime is over 40 minutes.

You'd think the HOA or Postal Service would put in locked boxes if it was such a criminal attractant. I can't think of the last time I got my mail from a box that wasn't locked.

[Buckwheet]

You'd think the HOA or Postal Service would put in locked boxes if it was such a criminal attractant. I can't think of the last time I got my mail from a box that wasn't locked.

They said no to that because it would block too much traffic. We tried a locked mailbox once, until they ran it over with the snowplows and then people just took the mail off the street.

I should also point out that they allowed a school bus dispatcher to go in after condemning a amusement park. All the neighbors didn't want it, but we lost. We demanded a sign go up that says All commercial traffic must turn left. sign to direct them to our non residential road and use a county road. Even though they did that and there is a city ordinance about it, all the buses turn right to go through our street. So every morning there is about 150-200 buses in a long string blocking traffic trying to leave the neighborhood. You get high on the diesel fumes in your car as they pass by.

They aren't the brightest people.

[Latrinsorm]

ACA was created to insure the 30 million American's without insurance. So.. DUH, they were not on HDHPs.

oddly enough, the CBO says with ACA, there will be.. GASP 30+ million uninsured Americans.

There were approximately 48 million uninsured Americans in 2011. You are correct that the CBO predicts 30 million uninsured with ACA, but that factoid loses a lot of punch when the first is corrected.

By being young and healthy and not being able to afford it?

Neither young nor healthy have causal impact on a being's future state. In fact, nearly 100% of people who were once young and healthy are not anymore.

I'll tell you how. They weigh their risks versus their assets and determine if it's a risk they want to take. It's called, "freedom", and we're forgetting what it is. If I don't need insurance, I shouldn't have to buy it. Period.

What is your % chance of developing cancer? I will accept precision to merely the hundredths place, as there are no fractional cents.

It may not be intelligent to take my life savings and bet it all on red, but guess what? IT'S MY SAVINGS. I'll do what I please with it, and people (including myself) have fought for my right to do so. Obummer signs away another liberty. The pen is indeed mightier than the sword.

You faced down a bullet for roulette?

See the bolded portion. If these previously uninsurable are now insurable and able to cover their "affordable" premiums now, then why do we need the mandate again?

Because people are not always rational. Specifically: an otherwise identical program will always, always get more participants by being opt-out than opt-in.

[Wrathbringer]

There were approximately 48 million uninsured Americans in 2011. You are correct that the CBO predicts 30 million uninsured with ACA, but that factoid loses a lot of punch when the first is corrected.Neither young nor healthy have causal impact on a being's future state. In fact, nearly 100% of people who were once young and healthy are not anymore.What is your % chance of developing cancer? I will accept precision to merely the hundredths place, as there are no fractional cents.You faced down a bullet for roulette?Because people are not always rational. Specifically: an otherwise identical program will always, always get more participants by being opt-out than opt-in.

I faced down a bullet for freedom, so if roulette is my thing, then yes. If it's not yours, fine. I should not be compelled by government to buy anything. Why is this being forced on us? Tyranny in the name of the poor. That's why.

[Wrathbringer]

A buddy of mine posted this on facebook today. I lol'd.

Mr. President,
Of course the websites for heathcare were flooded with people signing up but to say it means all the millions of people want the healthcare is false...you mandated it Dick. We have no choice without a fine.

[Buckwheet]

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/vi...kodil.wls.html

Wish they would have an expert explain how their care was paid for, and how it would be paid for under the ACA. There was another case where a guy was bragging on some radio show about going 180 on his bike and crashing and running up a couple million in hospital bills.

I would be curious about the same things with his care. You know, Darwin and all. He was covered under his parent's insurance.

[Latrinsorm]

I should not be compelled by government to buy anything.

Why? Is there an Amendment that explicitly guarantees that? Either a real Amendment or one of those fake liberal unConstitutional ones are acceptable.

Why is this being forced on us?

There are numerous causes. Aside from the obvious schism between the liberals and the conservatives, there are economic factors, both domestic and inter-...

Tyranny in the name of the poor. That's why.

Tyranny in the name of the poor it is, sir! Now, which way to the unemployment office?

Still waiting on your risk assessment, by the way.

[Shaps]

Anyone think the President sounded like an infomercial salesman you see on late night TV today during his speech?

He is such a joke.

[Valthissa]

Why? Is there an Amendment that explicitly guarantees that? Either a real Amendment or one of those fake liberal unConstitutional ones are acceptable.

I recommend you Google and read the opinion in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. While not a real or fake amendment, the current court did say that the individual mandate was not constitutional under the commerce clause (which surprised many legal scholars). As you may recall, the mandate survived as a tax.

So as an assertion:

'I should not be compelled by the government to buy medical insurance'

would just be restating the actual result as written by Chief Justice Roberts.

Who knows what the future will bring, but right now, 'I should not be compelled by the government to buy medical insurance' is backed by the majority of justices on the court.

[Jarvan]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...idual-mandate/

It's kinda funny, now that it isn't an issue, NOW they say they won't rule it out.