The American Ruling Class

[rickoff]

My father got his health insurance cancellation today, thanks to Obamacare
He has had Anthem for the past year. It was basic coverage for a great price. Only needed it for any dire emergencies.
His private plan only cost $190 a month, on the cancellation notice they say they can switch to a comparable plan that is "compliant" with Obamacare.....for $485

"If you like your plan, you can keep it!"
Obama should be impeached.

Thanks for the example. This seems to be typical, rather than the exception, of what is happening as people get canceled. Take a photo of your dad holding his cancellation notice so that it can be read and send it to MyCancellation.com Then share the website with all your friends.

The House vote to let people keep their old plan for one year probably won't go anywhere in the Senate, and it is doubtful that Barry would sign it anyways. Besides, why vote for a one year delay when the solution is to permanently end the mandate. This vote only sets the House up to make some kind of meaningless compromise.

I don't see how Barry can be impeached. There are plenty of valid reasons why he should be dethroned, but you really can't impeach someone who was never qualified to hold the office because the fact that he was not qualified means that he cannot possibly be President of the United States of America. He can only be pretending to be President, and that is not an impeachable offense.

[dutchdivco]

If the 'plan' IS implemented,

Or, to the degree that the plan is implemented, it may DOOM O'bummercare, long term. It is 5-10% of the total # of PEOPLE that have and want health insurance, its true. (The people who are primarily in the 'private insurance market), but they represent a much larger % of the 'invincibles' O'bummercare MUST sign up in the exchanges, in order to offset the cost of care for the older and chronically sick.
And, the reason delaying the mandate for a year was/is fought so vigourously, is because THAT would doom O'bummercare. They (the insurance companies) MUST be able to look at their enrollment #'s at SOME point, and detirmine what NEXT years premiums are going to be. IF their aren't enough of the 'invincibles' enrolled, (because they have been allowed to keep their 'old' policy, the companies will raise their rates, and/or be 'subsidised' by the Fed for the difference. This was one of the clauses neccesary to getting the Insurance companies 'buy in'. So, they can't loose, just the cost of o'bummercare goes way up.
Repealing the tax on Medical devices CHANGES the cost estimates of the Congressional Budget office; they are mandated to make their projections based on what the law is at the time. Change the law, by eliminating this tax, as an example, and you change the cost. If the Gov't. has to compensate the insurance companies for revenue 'lost', that also greatly inflates the 'cost' of O'bummercare. We've been told, at least, that the thing was cragfted so it only works if you have all the parts; eliminate the mandate, allow people who want to keep their own policy, have too many invincibles decide its 'better' for them to just pay the tax, ANY of these could doom the 'plan'. And, if you raise the 'tax' to a level that will compel compliance, its no longer a tax, its a penalty, and Scotus will weigh in on that. I too, was disappointed in Roberts decision, but it may yet be a blessing. If 2 years down the road, it is detirmined that the only thing that can 'save' O'bummercare is to raise the 'tax' a significant amount, then its doomed!
Jim

[rickoff]

Regarding the CNN documentary titled "The Assassination of President Kennedy," which has been shown several times now, it turned out to be pretty much what I had expected. The only part which really made sense was a few clips where Mark Lane, the author of Rush To Judgment, spoke about the Warren Commission's failures and the media aiding in the cover-up. The documentary was pieced together with the intent of painting Oswald as the lone assassin, and in every instance where a doubt was raised they used Vince Bugliosi to make a last word statement to counter whatever issue was raised. Of course they never mentioned the fact that multiple doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital who had viewed Kennedy's head wounds had described a massive blowout wound to the right rear of Kennedy's head, and a small bullet wound in his throat,or that an x-ray technician at Bethesda Naval Hospital had reported seeing the same before the autopsy was performed. That would have been seen by viewers as compelling evidence that the autopsy report, and Warren Commission findings were a cover-up of the medical evidence, and Bugliosi would have had a very difficult time trying to persuade viewers that all these professional eyewitnesses were wrong.

I wish that Tom Hanks had gone with the real evidence which of course smacks down the "official" story, but of course if he had done that then this documentary never would have aired.

There was one thing which Bugliosi said that was valid, and that had to do with frames 312 and 313 of the Zapruder film, but I'll save that for another post.

[5150]

My father got his health insurance cancellation today, thanks to Obamacare
He has had Anthem for the past year. It was basic coverage for a great price. Only needed it for any dire emergencies.
His private plan only cost $190 a month, on the cancellation notice they say they can switch to a comparable plan that is "compliant" with Obamacare.....for $485

"If you like your plan, you can keep it!"
Obama should be impeached.

Well do your part to help make the impeachment happen! Contact your representative and send them a letter demanding they put forward impeachment papers. Then get on line and look for any petitions that are for Obama's impeachment and fill it out.

Then when you're finished doing everything you can then find 2-3 people to help do the same things. If everyone does this then the number of people calling for his impeachment will gain traction.

From what I am seeing the entire Obama care debacle is imploding on itself with that one huge lie, "IF you like your current plan you can keep it" as the entire Obama care system was designed around a standard of coverage that would automatically cancel EVERY plan that didn't meet the new criteria and everyone in DC including Obama knew this, they just didn't expect the huge backlash. Those criminals in DC have grown use tot he fact that the people can be hoodwinked and lied to and they felt this time was no different, except this time the people are being forced to pay money out of their own pockets and out of their hard earned money on a forced mandate based on lies. The people are not happy and not going to accept it.

There is no fix for this problem of all the cancelled policies and delaying them until after the mid term elections wont do anything but buy more time but it still will not fix the problem. The truth is without EVERYONE being forced into higher coverage and a set standard then Obama care will not work.

There is no escaping the fact that the ACA act will be the black eye and downfall of Obama and his administration. Nixon was quoted as saying I am not a crook and I did not know anything about the break in, George Bush Sr said "read my lips, no new taxes" and shortly there after there were forced new taxes. Clinton said, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" and we all know about the pretty dress with the stain on it, and now we have Obama saying 19 times, "If you like your plan you can keep it, PERIOD!" and we all now know that was a lie.

The person I'd like to see get hit the hardest is Nancy Pelosi who said "We need to pass the bill so we can see what's in it" and with that kind of mentality its like saying hey we need to shoot our self in the foot to see if it's going to hurt and how bad. That drunk lady needs to be recalled and fired and have her entire pension removed. She is actually more dangerous than Obama IMHO

[dutchdivco]

Not the ONLY lie,

although it might be the 'biggest', as thats a matter of perception. A great many lies were told, and had to be told, in order to get this thing passed.
"There are and will not be any 'death panels'!" Of COARSE there will be! The U.S. spends 90% of its health care $'s on peolple for their last year of life.
"There won't be 'rationing' of healthcare, under the ACA!" Of COARSE there will be. Simple math; if people are paying for healthcare insurance, they're going to use it more than if they have none. So, if ACA does what it is SAID its going to do, and gets a significant # of people who weren't insured, insured, thats going to place more demand on providers. Been in any Dr.'s ofice waiting rooms where your the only patient? There is currently no shortage of demand for services. And we're going to increease the demand? With what? There is already a significant shortage of Dr.'s in rural areas!

The lies, half-truths, ommissions told to pass it were necesary, because if 'they' had told the truth from the beginning, it WOULDN'T have passed.Jim

[5150]

Nothing but lies

Obama has lied from day one before he was even president.

He promised the most transparent administration in history yet its actually the most closed and secret administration in history.

What ever happened to closing Gitmo in the first 90 days? Gitmo is still not only open but has expanded.

I could go on and list hundreds of examples but most of the smart people already understand it all and know anyone in DC regardless of their party is nothing but a lying criminal.

Remember that LA police officer (Donner?) who went on a shooting spree trying to expose the corruption in the LA police Department? He was basically doing the same thing the LA police department does yet they shut his ass down super fast then burned the little cabin house he was in, all of this after shooting up a mini van with innocent women inside simply because their vehicle matched the description of his car.

While I am not advocating or attempting to incite violence of any type I am of the firm belief that the only way to stop Washington DC and any and all government control of the people will only be found through the use of lethal force or out right uprising of the people in a type of citizens war.

Let me again for the record clearly state I am not advocating or inciting any violence at this time but I am for "all options on the table" as the government so eloquently puts it when dealing with other nations that do no conform to the US demands.

I also have no issue with myself personally using a weapon to defend my personal freedoms and liberty and I will not submit to any government mandates or BS over me.

There will soon come a point where the government will not be able to provide for its people and there will be mass riots and death and anyone not able to see this clusterbuck coming down the pike one day in the not to far future is totally blind.

[aljhoa]

The Food Stamp Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is proud to be distributing this year the greatest amount of free Meals and Food Stamps ever, to 47.5 million people as of the most recent figures available in April 2013.

Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, asks us “Please Do Not Feed the Animals.”

Their stated reason for the policy is because “The animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves.” Say what…????
Irony #2 | Libertarian

Al

[dutchdivco]

Al

Great post and point. The first time I recall hearing the phrase (in 'everyday' conversation) "Moral hazard" was during discussions about TARP, and the 'bailout'.
The CONCEPT has been around for a long time, though. If you 'reward' bad behavior, and or penalise good and responsible behavior, there are long term ramifications.
In TARP, the Gov't bailed out many institutions, despite their irresponsible behavior. And encouraged them to continue to engage in such behavior, witness what happened with the "London Whale", which happened AFTER the whole 'bailout'.
O'bummercare, as I pointed out earlier, is another example; those people who were being responsible, and purchasing their own policies, are being 'penalised' in order to reward the irresponsibles, by 'giving' them subsidised policies; many of those who were buying their own 'individual' policies won't qualify for the 'subsideies'.
And of coarse Food stamps. WIC, aid to families with dependent children, Earned income credit, etc. can ALL be seen as 'feeding the animals'.
Feed a starving man today, and he'll be hungry (and so you'll have to feed him, again) tommorrow. Teach him how to fish, (provide for himself) today, and your done. Churches, of whatever stripe, have known this for a long time, and have been 'ministering' to the poor since the middle ages. They (churches) are not 'perfect' institutions by any manner or means, but they are much more adept at teaching people to fish, than the Gov't.

Seems to me that 'we' collectively as a species are not teaching an ever increasing percentage of our offspring to provide for themselves. Isn't the primary obligation that one generation owes the next, the ability to provide for themselves? And if we fail in that, isn't the consequence inevitable? Jim

[dutchdivco]

5150

It is not illegal, for politician to lie, so in most cases, it is not criminal. Wonder what politics would be like if, before every speach, a politician was required to swear an oath, under 'penalties and pains of perjury', so that he/she COULD be prosecuted for lieing?

ALL politicians lie, they just hope they won't get caught, I guess. The system is set up that the people will be judge, and won't vote for them again. But what penalty is there, to a President who is in his second term, and so can't run again? Panalty to the party? I guess we'll see,....Jim

[rickoff]

Here's a link to a website which has a medical plan said to exempt people from the ObummerCare mandate, and is lower in cost.

[rickoff]

Yesterday, in Washington DC, a notable rally took place in Lafayette Park, across from the White House. Larry Klayman, a former Reagan Justice Department lawyer, organized the event with the help of the Reclaim America Now coalition, which is composed of about three-dozen conservative groups, including 2 Million Bikers to D.C., Jihad Watch, Freedom Watch, Gun Owners of America, Accuracy in Media, Tea Party Patriots and the Western Center for Journalism.

Several prominent speakers, including Klayman, appeared at the event, which Klayman said was the beginning of "the second American Revolution." Klayman went on to say that,“We the People have had enough of the corrupt and incompetent ways of the Obama administration and its bipartisan political enablers. It is time for action, not words.In the style of Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. and others who have changed history and reclaimed freedom, Americans have no choice – as the three branches of government have completely abdicated their representation of citizens’ complaints. The government needs to fear that the people will rise up if things do not change in Washington, D.C.”

Another speaker, former Sen. Gordon Humphrey, R-N.H., warned, “We are on the doorstep of tyranny, and that is not an overstatement. It is our goal to roll back this incipient tyranny and re-establish freedom for generations to come. We want accountability, Mr. President, and, by God, sooner or later, we are going to get it.”

Former Graham County, Ariz., Sheriff Richard Mack called it, “My kind of rally – a bunch of “crazy” people who believe in God, the Bible and the Constitution.”

I doubt that this event was given any serious news coverage by the lamestream media, but the very fact that it actually took place just a stone's throw from the White House is very significant. A large poster set up by the speaking podium featured a likeness of Thomas Jefferson, and his famous quote that, "When the government fears the people there is liberty." I do hope that this will be but the first of many such rallies, and that they will vastly multiply the numbers of those attending. Rallies alone will do little or nothing to change the tyranny that has overtaken Washington, but if lawmakers are made to realize that the People are fed up with their tyranny, and that these rallies are a warning of what is to come if politicians do not heed the warning, there is a strong possibility that Congress, the administration, and the judicial system, will begin to listen, and to reverse course. If not, then the threat must be carried forward or it has no consequence, and all future threats will be ignored.

[aljhoa]

Seems to me that 'we' collectively as a species are not teaching an ever increasing percentage of our offspring to provide for themselves.

'we'? or is it "U" and "many snouts in the trough"

Al

[dutchdivco]

Heres the thing.

During the run-up to the SCOTUS decision on ACA, the talking heads of all stripes were saying the same thing. O'bummercare has certain 'key' provisions, and if you eliminate or modify any one of them, the whole thing is in danger of a 'death spiral'. They pointed out that the mandate is ONE of these 'key provisions'.
The reason they say this is the basic premise of ACA is getting enough 'young, invincibles' signed up and paying premiums, to offset the cost of care for the 'older, chronically ill'. At the time they were saying this because they were speculating that SCOTUS would rule the penalty unconstitutional, which as we know didn't happen.
But, if the people who have these cancelled policies WERE 'allowed' to keep there policies, it COULD contribute to this 'death spiral' of ACA.
Probably 99% of the people who have these policies are 'young, invincibles', cause thats who HAS these policies. So, while the 'individual market' only represents 5 million out of 350 million, it represents a significant chunk of the 'young invincibles', so much so that you can't (in effect) take them out of the system.
By 'death spiral', (as I understand it) they mean this; IF enough 'young, invincibles' don't sign up for policies, the Insurance companies will have to raise their rates, since they will be insuring primarily older/sicker and chronically ill. The rates will climb, and there is no way the 'rebate' the Gov't is providing will be enough to make it financially viable for ANYONE to get insurance. The whole thing 'falls apart', and what then?
Unlike Rick, I regularly watch the Sunday 'political' talk shows. This last Sunday, I saw several talking heads, of both 'stripes' (Liberal and Conservative) speculating on the demise of ACA.

If you write a law so that the ONLY way it can work is if it is enacted as written, and then you find you need to make changes, WHAT do you do?

Either those who said "The only way the ACA can work, is if all of the key provisions are enacted as written" are WRONG, or the ACA is 'doomed'.

My understanding is the SCOTUS decision stated that the penalty is a tax, BUT if it is increased to the point that it becomes too 'onerous' SCOTUS would re-visit the ? In other words, if as a result of allowing these people to keep their policies, distrust of the security of the website, and Y/I's deciding to 'just pay the tax' rather than sign up, the ACA becomes 'threatened', the tax can NOT be increased, to compel compliance, cause then it becomes a penalty, instead of a tax, and therefore unconstitutional.

So, if my understanding is correct, thats one 'fix' that is unavailable.

I'm also seariously wondering about the real costs of O'bummercare. Repealing the medical devices tax, if they do it, will in effect INCREASE the cost of ACA. The ACA is going to decimate the Insurance co-ops, which the Government guaranteed 1 Billion $'s worth of loans to set up. How much is the Gov't going to be spending for these 'subsidies', ultimately?

How much additional $ will go to fraud? Whats it REALLY going to end up costing?Jim

[rickoff]

My understanding is the SCOTUS decision stated that the penalty is a tax, BUT if it is increased to the point that it becomes too 'onerous' SCOTUS would re-visit the ? In other words, if as a result of allowing these people to keep their policies, distrust of the security of the website, and Y/I's deciding to 'just pay the tax' rather than sign up, the ACA becomes 'threatened', the tax can NOT be increased, to compel compliance, cause then it becomes a penalty, instead of a tax, and therefore unconstitutional.

This understanding is actually a common misunderstanding, Jim. The SCOTUS ruled that while it would be unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause to mandate that everyone purchase insurance, it would not be unconstitutional under Congress' broad powers to impose taxes, and that the ObummerCare mandates were actually a tax. So keep in mind that the cost of purchasing a ObummerCare approved policy is the tax, and the fine for not buying a policy is a tax penalty. And as I have stated before in this thread, paying a tax penalty does not release anyone from their obligation to pay the actual tax amount. As long as the tax remains unpaid, interest fees and new penalty amounts will be added to what the person owes. It is astounding to me why it appears that no one in "government," the media, or the IRS, has made mention of this. I doubt that this factor will be made known to the public until after the first large wave of tax defaults has occurred. Folks will think they are getting off the hook by paying the tax penalty, but then they will get a bill from the IRS for the tax amount, interest, and a warning that if not paid by such-and-such date that a further penalty amount will be added.

[5150]

This understanding is actually a common misunderstanding, Jim. The SCOTUS ruled that while it would be unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause to mandate that everyone purchase insurance, it would not be unconstitutional under Congress' broad powers to impose taxes, and that the ObummerCare mandates were actually a tax. So keep in mind that the cost of purchasing a ObummerCare approved policy is the tax, and the fine for not buying a policy is a tax penalty. And as I have stated before in this thread, paying a tax penalty does not release anyone from their obligation to pay the actual tax amount. As long as the tax remains unpaid, interest fees and new penalty amounts will be added to what the person owes. It is astounding to me why it appears that no one in "government," the media, or the IRS, has made mention of this. I doubt that this factor will be made known to the public until after the first large wave of tax defaults has occurred. Folks will think they are getting off the hook by paying the tax penalty, but then they will get a bill from the IRS for the tax amount, interest, and a warning that if not paid by such-and-such date that a further penalty amount will be added.

I totally agree with you that many people misunderstand the additional penalties, interest and "options" the IRS has and WILL take to get their money.

I have heard the penalty and the actual tax will be taken from a persons (workers) end of the year tax return or wages. If the person owns a home then the tax penalty can be added to the property as a lien and if not paid well then a person can lose their home over this. There was recently a lady who lost her home as it was sold (legally) by her HOA for an unpaid balance of under $300.00 so don't think the IRS cannot get your property.

Then for those who do not have property of other "assets" to garnish or lien the government can and will suspend your drivers license as driving is a privilege (Not a right as they say) and a person can lose their license and driving privilege for up to a year or longer if they do not "Comply" with the new law and pay their taxes and penalties.

Of course this is all total BS in my opinion and even if its constitutional its not right. I am of the hope that with more time the ACA / Obama care act will basically be exposed for what it truly is ( a total failure) that you wont be ale to cover with any amount of lipstick.

The ACA will eventually either self implode or the people will finally get so upset when they see firsthand just what a disastrous lie it really was that is will die a painful and costly death. Either way its doomed and will go down in history as the turning point of the new revolution that is head your way.

In other news the US government lost 10 BILLION tax payer dollars on the GM bailout but the good news is it saved a few hundred jobs and now GM can start paying incentives and higher salaries to its managers again. The tax payers don't even get any free automobile lube with their screwing