Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Wrut Ro Raggy (0-Care content)
Collapse
X
-
Wrut Ro Raggy (0-Care content)
Originally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-Tags: None
-
Originally posted by mrsleeve View PostOriginally posted by Grueliusand i do not know what bugg brakes are.
Comment
-
Yeah and.....
"all individuals must have coverage."
— Those below 300 percent of the federal poverty level (about $38,500 for a family of three in 2007), but not eligible for Medicaid, will have their private insurance plans subsidized at a sliding-scale rate.
— Children whose families earn below 300 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL) will be given free coverage through Medicaid.
— Individuals with incomes below the FPL ($9,600) will have premiums waived on private insurance. (Currently most childless adults, no matter what their income, are not eligible for coverage under the state's Medicaid plan.)
— Those who can afford insurance will be increasingly penalized for not buying coverage. In the first year, they'll lose their state personal income tax exemption.
— Family coverage will be extended to cover young adults up to the age of 25.
— Allows the use of "health savings accounts" with cheaper high-deductible "catastrophic" coverage plans. HSAs allow consumers to invest money and withdraw it "tax free" to cover health-care costs.
Businesses
All employers who have more than 10 employees must contribute to employee health-care costs.
— Employers who don't provide insurance will pay an annual fee of $295 per full-time employee.
— Encourages private insurers to offer more low-cost options.
— Creates a "health insurance connector" to help individuals and businesses find affordable private coverage.
Free insurance for poor people?
And my kids could get free health care, even if my wife and I jointly bring $66,000? That's the 300% figure for 2010. Sounds pretty liberal.
They could if I lived where the above was signed into law. By a Republican, no less. Which makes me want to ask, if it was Bush and not Obama, would there be nearly as much push-back? Romney's plan requires you to buy something and/or pay fees, so.....?
Don't get me wrong....I'm no fan of any bill that our representatives can't be bothered to read. Just wondering if all those DA's would still be trying to find a way to kill it were it from one of their own.
Comment
-
As usual this will continue through our fucked up court system. In the end parts of the bill will be ignored and the rest will go into effect while what will go into effect will be very badly implemented requiring even more work to "fix" it (more destruction of the health care industry).
In the mean time keep handing out those waivers for (mostly) Unions to have their retirees skip out.Your signature picture has been removed since it contained the Photobucket "upgrade your account" image.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the [federal] government." ~ James Madison
"If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen" Barack Obama
Comment
-
Originally posted by joshh View PostIn the end parts of the bill will be ignored and the rest will go into effect while what will go into effect will be very badly implemented requiring even more work to "fix" it..
Comment
-
Originally posted by KenC View PostThe judge didn't issue an injunction.Originally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-
Comment
-
Originally posted by mrsleeve View Postwhy would an injunction be necessary when the law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, there for NUll and void by its very nature. Cease and desist is implied.
That's standard procedure in the legal system no matter what kind of law or at what level of the judiciary it's being challenged. Anything that has been signed in to law remains law while appeals are ongoing unless an injunction is ordered by a judge (and even then the injunction can be appealed and delayed).
This is a fight that will end up going all the way to the supreme court, guaranteed. It just maintains to be seen whether the outcome will be to support the law in it's current form, to rule the 'mandate' section unconstitutional or to nullify the whole thing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by CorvallisBMW View PostNo, a judge would have to order an injunction for the law to be overturned immediately. Since the gov't will no doubt appeal all the way to the supreme court the law will stay on the books and in effect until which time the supreme court rules either in favor of the gov't or against it.
Originally posted by CorvallisBMWThat's standard procedure in the legal system no matter what kind of law or at what level of the judiciary it's being challenged. Anything that has been signed in to law remains law while appeals are ongoing unless an injunction is ordered by a judge (and even then the injunction can be appealed and delayed).
Originally posted by CorvallisBMWThis is a fight that will end up going all the way to the supreme court, guaranteed. It just maintains to be seen whether the outcome will be to support the law in it's current form, to rule the 'mandate' section unconstitutional or to nullify the whole thing.
but you have to admit the administration thumbing its nose at the SCOTUS a year ago and now this is just plain despicable is it not???Originally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-
Comment
-
The legal procedures are the same in this case or any other. If a law is on the books it stays on the books until all appeals are exhausted OR a judge orders an injunction. You may not like it, but that's how it is. Tough shit.
Also note that the purchase mandate has not gone in to effect yet and will not go in to effect until 2014, so an injunction is unlikely for a law which currently does not apply.
And what exactly is "despicable"? Appealing a ruling you don't agree with? It happens hundreds of times every day.
Comment
-
Originally posted by CorvallisBMW View Post.
And what exactly is "despicable"? Appealing a ruling you don't agree with? It happens hundreds of times every day.Originally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-
Comment
-
well 2 judges ignored and the entire SCOUTS called out in the SOTU last yearOriginally posted by FusionIf a car is the epitome of freedom, than an electric car is house arrest with your wife titty fucking your next door neighbor.
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-
Comment
-
Originally posted by mrsleeve View Postthe out right contempt and ignoring of the courts
Appealing a case is NOT contempt and it is NOT ignoring... c'mon man, I know you are smarter than that.
Originally posted by mrsleeve View Postwell 2 judges ignored and the entire SCOUTS called out in the SOTU last year
And the first 2 judges who ruled said is WAS constitutional. Currently the score is 2-2.
God knows if if the conservatives passed a law that you felt passionatly about and agreed with, you'd be defending that to the nth degree if the Democrats tried to challenge it in court.
As much as you want the law to bend to you're own will, it doesn't
Comment
Comment