Meanwhile back at the ranch,

[Eagle Road]

[QUOTE=FuriousXGeorge;1723677]

You could use "but we don't have a budget!" against literally any bill. It's a complete nonsense argument. You don't like Obamacare meaning you have to find a new plan? Actually, I have NO IDEA if I will "like" Obamacare or not, CAN'T GET ON THE FUCKING THING TO GET A QOUTE< BEEN TWO WEEKS!


Well we can't fix that because Luxembourg has a budget and we don't! Kool-aid drinker!

You are simply having another tantrum and arguing for the sake of arguing because you don't like your idiocy being pointed out.

We don't have a budget because of the same political roadblocks I just pointed out, that in no way impacts the viability of potential programs whether the heritage foundation reform we did pass or single payer.

Your the one that looks like an idiot with statements like this, you do realize just who was in charge of all three branches the first two years on Obama's first term, right?

[FuriousXGeorge]

[QUOTE=Eagle Road;1723679]

[/COLOR]
[/B]


Your the one that looks like an idiot with statements like this, you do realize just who was in charge of all three branches the first two years on Obama's first term, right?

Yes, the executive and Congress was under the control of Democrats and the Supreme Court was under the control of a Conservative majority but I have no idea what brain damaged point you are attempting to make with the question.

[philly4life]

It's a bigger math fail because you believed a rumor - according to MSM left-wing site TheBlaze.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...t-634-million/

That was the total amount awarded to the company in contracts with the Health and Human Services department over the last 7 years.

And it was awarded through a competitive procurement process - so go complain to the efficient American companies that offered higher bids but were beaten out by a company from socialist Canada.

fair enough. like I said, I'm not a fan of the aca because of an underlying distrust of the govt. Still seems a lot to set up a website, and I'm sure waste and corruption will abound under aca (not like that's any different from the old system).

And I do know a little bit about govt procurement, and it isn't exactly an above board process. Just because this company got the contract, doesn't mean they were the best or cheapest option.

[Eagle Road]

[QUOTE=FuriousXGeorge;1723682]

Yes, the executive and Congress was under the control of Democrats and the Supreme Court was under the control of a Conservative majority but I have no idea what brain damaged point you are attempting to make with the question.

Pretty simple really, why no budget? You know, that pesky thing that President is REQUIRED BY LAW TO get done?

[FuriousXGeorge]

[QUOTE=Eagle Road;1723687]

Pretty simple really, why no budget? You know, that pesky thing that President is REQUIRED BY LAW TO get done?

Put down the can of gas for a minute and stop huffing. Wait a few minutes for the room to stop spinning.


Okay now, try and read this again:

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives. The barrier is the accusations of socialism aimed at the conservative plan we were forced to adopt instead that make it clear the political reality is that single payer will never be implemented here.

Anyway, a budget is just a gameplan. In the end what matters is the bills that actually authorize the spending. Obama can easily produce a budget, so can the Senate Dems, but it doesn't matter if everybody involved can't come together and agree. As long as Conservatives want to drown the government in a bathtub and liberals don't there is going to be contention around budget matters.

[Eagle Road]

[QUOTE=FuriousXGeorge;1723689]

Put down the can of gas for a minute and stop huffing. Wait a few minutes for the room to stop spinning.


Okay now, try and read this again:



Anyway, a budget is just a gameplan. In the end what matters is the bills that actually authorize the spending. Obama can easily produce a budget, so can the Senate Dems, but it doesn't matter if everybody involved can't come together and agree. As long as Conservatives want to drown the government in a bathtub and liberals don't there is going to be contention around budget matters.

A budget is one of the most fundamental procedures for any government, corporation, most households and individuals, so to say that the biggest economy in the world is running without one, and has been is irresponsible at the very least and speaks to the cluelessness of this administration.

I will give you a thumbs up for your definition of a budget as being a "game plan" your right, it is a game plan, so you are admitting that your hero, the great and powerful kazoo has no game plan, that's just great, and you think I should trust someone this irresponsible with my tax money and healthcare.

Also don't give me the BS line about to much diversion in the chambers to get a budget passed, the MOST progressive Congress of our time would not even garner ONE SINGLE VOTE for the first budget that OBAMA submitted, EVEN though HIS party had the MAJORITY in BOTH CHAMBERS.

[FuriousXGeorge]

[QUOTE=Eagle Road;1723691]

A budget is one of the most fundamental procedures for any government, corporation, most households and individuals, so to say that the biggest economy in the world is running without one, and has been is irresponsible at the very least and speaks to the cluelessness of this administration.

No, it does not. People have fundamental disagreements on the budget, and the liberal alternative of not drowning the government in a bathtub is the one with more of a clue. Clues don't matter though if the parties can't agree on things like funding Obamacare or taxing rich people at a sane level.

I will give you a thumbs up for your definition of a budget as being a "game plan" your right, it is a game plan, so you are admitting that your hero, the great and powerful kazoo has no game plan, that's just great, and you think I should trust someone this irresponsible with my tax money and healthcare.

You are as dumb as a potted plant. You are confusing my desire to deal with politics in reality as they exist instead of living in your angry toddler fantasy land as Obama worship. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012.

The President is willing to give you the game plan. It's right here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

I do not have to worship him to accept observable reality on the state of politics.

Also don't give me the BS line about to much diversion in the chambers to get a budget passed, the MOST progressive Congress of our time would not even garner ONE SINGLE VOTE for the first budget that OBAMA submitted, EVEN though HIS party had the MAJORITY in BOTH CHAMBERS.

How many lead pies did you eat as a child?

[Eagle Road]

[QUOTE=FuriousXGeorge;1723699][QUOTE=Eagle Road;1723691]

No, it does not. People have fundamental disagreements on the budget, and the liberal alternative of not drowning the government in a bathtub is the one with more of a clue. Clues don't matter though if the parties can't agree on things like funding Obamacare or taxing rich people at a sane level.



You are as dumb as a potted plant. You are confusing my desire to deal with politics in reality as they exist instead of living in your angry toddler fantasy land as Obama worship. I voted for Gary Johnson in 2012.

The President is willing to give you the game plan. It's right here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

I do not have to worship him to accept observable reality on the state of politics.



I read it before, and in real world terms it says "yeah look at me, I have lowered the DEFICIT",

Just don't pay any attention that the DEBT is growing uncontrollably, that doesn't matter,

I take it you have trouble reading between the lines?

Also, this is just ONE example of how the ACA is working (or not working) this is exactly what I am finding, that is going by another states calculator, since the Gov, official exchange STILL doesn't let me in.

Channel 19
Todd Dills
Obamacare case analysis: Stick with the wife’s insurance
Todd Dills | October 14, 2013

This image greets visitors to the HealthCare.gov central portal for applications for insurance purchased through the public exchanges mandated by the Affordable Care Act, or “Obamacare.” Best estimates of the cost of coverage for your particular situation, without going most of the way through the application process, can be found via the Kaiser Family Foundation’s costs/subsidy calculator, though only Silver-level plans are estimated there.Michigan resident Michael Wright was looking to newly re-mint his owner-operator business after a year driving a company truck with a partner working the North Dakota oil and gas fields hauling a tanker this fall. When I talked to him a day after the Affordable Care Act’s health-insurance exchanges opened, with no shortage of reported problems, Wright was in the process of purchasing a 2005 Western Star 4900 series with a 68-inch sleeper, powered by a 490-hp Detroit and a 13 speed transmission.

He was fairly certain everything would go forward as expected re: the loan for purchase, and following that, he and his business partner planned to run the rig, hauling fracking fluids in a tanker owned by the company he’ll be contracting with there. What he wasn’t certain about at that time: whether or not the 48-year-old’s health insurance would be available at the same rate – about $400 a month out of pocket, secured via his wife’s membership in a group plan offered by her employer, which pays for 50 percent of the premium for an overall cost of $800 or so. “She’s been there 25 years,” says Wright. “We’ve been informed it’s going up 130-plus percent this month. If that’s true, it’s going to be painful.”

In such a scenario, the couple would be looking at monthly out-of-pocket premium expenses well over $900 monthly to continue to participate in the company plan – Wright has been exploring other options. He says he searched plans available for himself using this calculator at a government site in Michigan. Inputting the basics of his and his wife’s ages, place of residence and income in that calculator yields a range of “gold” level plans, comparable to what the Wrights have now with 80/20 coinsurance, yields a $721-$1,634 range in potential monthly premiums. Wright, however, is a smoker – the Michigan calculator estimates an 18 percent surcharge for smokers, but the ACA itself allows as much as a 50 percent surcharge. What the surcharge would be depends on the insurer and plan, ultimately.

That $721-$1,634 range boosted by 18 percent: $851-$1,928

By 50 percent: $1,082-$2,451

Poll: How is Obamacare affecting your 2014 health insurance preparations?Under that calculation, Wright’s likely better off sticking with his wife’s company plan even with increases that come, such as they may be, though given overall costs, if the lower half of the estimated range is in fact equivalent to what his wife’s employer is offering, it’s tempting to see an incentive for employers to flee from company-provided group coverage. Keep in mind, for those with access to employer-provided coverage, there’s unlikely to be any subsidy/tax credit available to directly reduce premiums. And besides, the Wrights make too much yearly to qualify for subsidized premium reduction, likely to be the case for most in this audience.

Other calculators get into more exact calculations, such as that at the site of the Kaiser Family Foundation’s, endorsed by HealthCare.gov, the ACA exchanges’ official hub. However, that calculator only shows estimates for Silver (70/30 coinsurance) and Bronze (60/40) level plans. Inputting Wright’s information there yields an estimate of $8,801 in annual premiums for a silver-level plan, or $734 per month, $6,595 for a Bronze plan, or $549 a month. Coverage levels with both plans are not equal to what Wright has currently, however. Assuming a more costly Gold level plan, he’s likely better off sticking with is wife’s employer-provided coverage from the premium pricing perspective.

What’s your case look like? Have you seen success or had trouble attempting to enroll via the public exchanges, which some tech experts are reportedly considering calling the “highest-profile and most complete failure on a major web launch” ever, given widespread technical problems…

[Eagle Road]

BTW, this is my last post in this thread, carry on, you win. I find it impossible to debate any points about the Gov. when the other person's opinion thinks it's just fine that the largest economy in the world is good without a budget.

Thinks that it is no problem that the president can't seem to meet his sworn duties, and that if we ever get to a Single Payer System that we should just all throw our tax money into a large black hole for the Gov. to take care of and disperse for only said program.

Especially when we have DECADES of PROOF that Government and Politicians are unable/unwilling to do so!

[Eagle Road]

[QUOTE=Eagle Road;1723691]

A budget is one of the most fundamental procedures for any government, corporation, most households and individuals, so to say that the biggest economy in the world is running without one, and has been is irresponsible at the very least and speaks to the cluelessness of this administration.

I will give you a thumbs up for your definition of a budget as being a "game plan" your right, it is a game plan, so you are admitting that your hero, the great and powerful kazoo has no game plan, that's just great, and you think I should trust someone this irresponsible with my tax money and healthcare.

Also don't give me the BS line about to much diversion in the chambers to get a budget passed, the MOST progressive Congress of our time would not even garner ONE SINGLE VOTE for the first budget that OBAMA submitted, EVEN though HIS party had the MAJORITY in BOTH CHAMBERS.

Just wanted to clear up what you obviously missed.

[FuriousXGeorge]

[B]I read it before, and in real world terms it says "yeah look at me, I have lowered the DEFICIT",

ER: MEANY OBAMA doesn't even have a budget gameplan!

FXG: Yes he does.

ER: YEAH BUT I DON'T LIKE IT!

This is why I call you a toddler. You don't care about any of your points because you just change them to find something else to be angry about when your bubble is burst. This isn't about a conversation, just about you being emotional and upset.

BTW, this is my last post in this thread, carry on, you win. I find it impossible to debate any points about the Gov. when the other person's opinion thinks it's just fine that the largest economy in the world is good without a budget.

See, now the made up position the toddler has created for me is that I'm okay with no budget. I would prefer one, but the appropriations bills are what really matters since they actually authorize the spending. You are confusing me not caring with me noting the objective realty that this as a complex problem in which multiple political perspectives are unable to come to an agreement and negotiations are ongoing. You think I don't care because I don't have a toddler tantrum and pretend it is solely the fault of one politician I don't like. You can find other ways to engage with politics besides holding your breath and stamping your feet and whining.

Just don't pay any attention that the DEBT is growing uncontrollably, that doesn't matter,

"I'M MAD AT THAT MEANY OBAMA HE DIDN'T INSTANTLY END THE TRILLIONS IN NATIONAL DEBT HE ENTERED INTO OFFICE WITH AND HAD TO GROW TO SAVE A CATASTROFUCK OF AN ECONOMY!"

The deficit is shrinking, but you can't really end it or start to put a dent into the debt until the economy recovers. Without any changes in policy entering into a real boom right now would hugely increase revenue. The slow pace of the recovery is counterproductive to reversing course on debt, and more stimulus would be a good goal instead of more spending cuts. It goes to the same goal of putting our fiscal house in order.

Debt is not a bad thing when it is cheap to borrow and you know you are not in danger of missing any payments. (Absent psychotic Republicans threatening to miss them for no reason, that's our current situation.) Any smart businessman knows you can grow your business through loans.

Just wanted to clear up what you obviously missed.

I repeated this for you already but you seem to have the memory of a goldfish so let me try a few more times.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

The barriers to this system are people voting for conservative Dems, Republicans, and other conservatives.

So please try and read one of those repetitions before coming out of your glue huffing haze to try and imply I am missing anything again.
-
The website is indeed a clusterfuck. It's a shame for Republicans they took the news cycle with the shutdown because they would have been in a much better position if they let that lead the news for a week.

[ashaman]

Idiots will always be idiots. I'm surprised people spend so much time debating with online idiots who don't even understand how the economy work. Lala land is where they belong.