85 replies to this topic

[Rogerdodger]

Washington politicians: Welcome to our world!

You have to sign it to see what's in it.

Wrinkle in Health Law Vexes Lawmakers’ Aides
Under a wrinkle that dates back to enactment of the law, members of Congress and thousands of their aides are required to get their coverage through new state-based markets known as insurance exchanges.

But the law does not provide any obvious way for the federal government to continue paying its share of the premiums for the comprehensive coverage.

If the government cannot do so, it could mean an additional expense of $5,000 a year for individuals and $11,000 for families under some of the most popular plans.
staff members were “freaked out” at the prospect of paying the full cost of insurance out of their own pockets.

“They’re thinking about leaving government service,”

Edited by Rogerdodger, 30 July 2013 - 10:48 AM.

[stocks]

ObamaCare has already achieved much of what its architects intended —

if you agree with me that the purpose of the law was to:

line the pockets of certain connected cronies.

create an industry-wide consolidation in the insurance and hospital business.

inject mass chaos into the already dysfunctional medical marketplace.

generate fear amongst physicians such that many would succumb to the hostile takeover offers of the rich hospitals.

implement the most egregious breach of patient confidentiality by collecting private health information and records.

If this was the purpose, then the bureaucrats would declare their efforts a success even if the whole thing is repealed at this point.

The UCA is crony capitalism at its finest. How would you like to own a company whose product people are forced to buy? Sound like a money-maker?


http://www.oaoa.com/...19bb30f31a.html

[Rogerdodger]

When the "AFFORDABLE" becomes the "UNAFFORDABLE" before an election, you delay it.

According to the Congressional Research Service, as of November 2011, the Obama administration had missed as many as one-third of the deadlines, specified by law, under the Affordable Care Act.
(Isn't that illegal by definition?)
Here are the details on the latest one.

Out-Of-Pocket Caps Waived Until 2015
Sebelius: 'This Is Not A Bait-And-Switch'..."This is the law of the land.” (We just keep changing it to suit our whims.)

According to the law, the limits on out-of-pocket costs for 2014 were $6,350 for individual policies and $12,700 for family ones. But in February, the Department of Labor published a little-noticed rule delaying the cap until 2015.
As a result, a consumer may be required to pay $6,350 for doctors' services and hospital care, and an additional $6,350 for prescription drugs under a plan administered by a pharmacy benefit manager."

These mandates have already had drastic effects on a number of colleges and universities, which offer inexpensive, defined-cap plans to their healthy, youthful students.
Premiums at Lenoir-Rhyne University in Hickory, N.C., for example, rose from $245 per student in 2011-2012 to between $2,507 in 2012-2013.
Other schools have been forced to drop coverage because they could no longer afford it.

While insurers and premium-payers will be happy with the delay—whose legal justification is dubious once again—there are groups that grumbled. Specifically, groups representing those with chronic diseases, and the pharmaceutical companies whose costly drugs they will use. "The American Cancer Society shares the concern" about the delay, says Pear, "and noted that some new cancer drugs cost $100,000 a year or more." But a big part of the reason those drugs cost so much is because manufacturers know that government-run insurers will pay up.

Meanwhile the "AFFORDABLE" becomes the "UNAFFORDABLE"

Affordable Care Act lawsuit by Oklahoma gets judge's go-ahead

"Congress provided a choice for Oklahoma and other states in implementation of the health-care law, and the IRS is attempting to take that away by rule," Pruitt said. "The administration miscalculated how many states would support this law, so now they're using the IRS to push through provisions that Congress did not pass."

Edited by Rogerdodger, 13 August 2013 - 09:00 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

There used to be 3 branches of government.
The executive branch administered the laws agreed to by the legislative branch, and the judicial branch judged the legality of their implementation.
Now we have an executive branch picking, choosing, and changing laws, a legislative branch which hands over law making power to agencies such as the HHSA, EPA, DOE, etc., and a judicial branch which freely changes the wording in the law from "fines" to "taxes" in order to "make it legal."

What other surprises await us?

Can we also choose which laws we will obey?
It's good to be the King!

Edited by Rogerdodger, 13 August 2013 - 09:48 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

Bra sizes of female Detroit cops mistakenly emailed to all officers...
"it was really just a clerical error," said Assistant Chief James White.

Don't Open Obamacare Exchanges If Privacy Isn't Protected
Reuters recently reported that security testing for Obamacare is months behind schedule. And Michael Astrue, former HHS general counsel and Social Security commissioner, has warned that "unless delayed and fixed" the Obamacare exchanges will "inflict on the public the most widespread violation of the Privacy Act in our history."
"While I believe we ought to repeal this law and replace it with commonsense reforms that lower cost, Americans ought to be assured, at an absolute minimum, that their personal and financial data will be safe from data thieves. I am asking you to delay opening the exchanges until the Inspector General can guarantee the security of the exchanges."

(I thought the whole abortion law hinged on a woman's right to privacy...
Stupid me.)

Edited by Rogerdodger, 13 August 2013 - 10:44 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

What's up with NBC?
Last night they actually reported some real news!
(No doubt an IRS audit is in their future.)
The reporter interviewed a sandwich shop owner who mentioned that they were planning to cut 50 employees back to part-time workers because of Obamacare rules.
This will result in these employees losing around $200 a month in wages.
Luke Perfect, who has worked at Goodridge’s Kennebunk Subway for more than a decade, said it was “horrible” to learn he was among the employees whose hours would be limited, and that it would be a financial hardship. “I’m barely scraping by with overtime,” he said.

So they will still have no "free healthcare" and lose $2,400 a year while the friendly IRS agent sits on their death panel.

The White House dismisses such examples as "anecdotal."
http://investigation...oyee-hours?lite

I guess this is "anecdotal" too:
Teen unemployment rate in CA: 33%...

Edited by Rogerdodger, 14 August 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

This will make the ACORN players look like the Vienna Choirboys in comparison:

NO BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR OBAMACARE 'NAVIGATORS'...

“Because of time constraints, HHS [is] cutting back on the requirement to become a navigator, meaning they're not going to be doing background checks. They're not going to be fingerprinting these people,” said Bondi in an interview with Fox.
“And it's more than navigators. It's people that assist the navigators. Now, these navigators will have our consumers throughout the country's most personal and private information — tax return information, Social Security information. And our biggest fear, of course, is identity theft.”

“What if they've been convicted of committing identity theft or grand theft before?” asked Bondi.
“They could potentially still become a navigator.”


TRIB ON OBAMACARE: 'Let's delay, rewrite this ill-conceived law'...

Admin Has Missed Half of Legally Imposed Deadlines...

FOREVER 21 to do away with full-time employees...
Popular clothing company Forever 21 is the first of what might be many companies to limit its non-management workers’ hours to 29.5 a week, just below the 30-hour minimum that the ACA deems full-time work.
Forever 21’s management would love to continue employing full-time workers, provide them with substantial health care benefits, and maintain low prices for its customers. But in a nation with uniquely high health care costs, an issue that the Affordable Care Act fails to address, this is a regrettably unrealistic business model.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 19 August 2013 - 09:09 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

1 in 4 adults in NJ moving back in with parents...

100k residents lose health plan under Obamacare...

President Obama promised “if you like your health care plan, you’ll be able to keep your health care plan, period,” that will not be the case for approximately 106,000 New Jersey residents whose plans will disappear under the law. Known as the “basic and essential,” or B&E, health-care plans, the policy costs as little as a couple hundred dollars per month and is the choice of 71 percent of New Jersey residents on the individual insurance market. It provides minimum coverage for things such as doctor’s visits and procedures that don’t involve a hospital stay. According to the Newark Star-Ledger, B&E policy holders will, under Obamacare, “be left with may be a choice among pricey, pricier and priciest” plans.

Edited by Rogerdodger, 19 August 2013 - 03:20 PM.

[Rogerdodger]

The plan keeps on working as planned, destroying America's health care system so that the government will be "forced" (wink, wink) to take over.
"Never let a crisis go to waste, even if you are the one who caused it."

UPS to drop 15,000 spouses from insurance, cites Obamacare...

Edited by Rogerdodger, 21 August 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[AChartist]

As I was thinking all along,

the orwell-0-deathcare is a mass wealth transfer scam to the real .0001% ( no not mythical 1 in 100 of every household as you look down the street, 1%
the street ocupy psyop ) You would think the liberal mind would be getting embarrased and offended of being scammed on simple math by now.

So it ia emploding under its own weight, no government parasites, no irs parasites, no large employers contributing to it leaving the
w2 wage slave fending for themselves, textbook scam operation plain sight.

Oh, unrelated but its all the symtoms of the same same scam so it is all the same,
another real good C. Fitts. What she is talking about is everthing I have learned from other sources of other points of reference,
plus some, her referance is unique with huge new insights.

All this is the real deal as I have been learning it.
She comes on about 1/2 way, 1st part would have been entertaining if it wasnt 100% fact
Another with depth

Edited by AChartist, 25 August 2013 - 10:00 AM.