-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2011: Of Weiners, Boehners, Santorum, and Teabags
- Thread starter PantherLotus
- Start date
- Status
Dude Abides
Banned
polyh3dron said:
I don't think an hour of dodgeball twice a week makes much of a dent in childhood obesity. That said, it's not as though private schools don't have gym or music or other frivolities so eznark's complaint is an odd one.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
11:14 - Obama: "We're going to meet every single day until we get this thing resolved.
11:15 - Obama says he and Boehner had been trying to do "the biggest deal possible".
11:15 - "If not now, when." -- Obama repeats in public what he said to GOP leaders in private yesterday.
11:15 - Obama -- I want a deal. Now is the time for a deal. "Let's go"
11:17 - Obama - "We could achieve a situation in which our deficits are at a management level and our debt levels are stabilized."
11:18 - Obama: I will not consider 1-6 months stop-gap. "This is the United States of America, and we don't manage our affairs in 3-month increments.
11:21 Obama: "We might as well do it now, pull off the band-aid, eat our peas." In reference to taking a hard vote.
11:21 - Obama - "I am prepared to take on significant heat from our party to get something done."
11:23 - Obama self references himself as "author of best selling books"
11:24 - Obama - "I have bent over backwards to work with Republicans..."
11:24 - Obama - "I do not see a path to a deal if they do not budge period. (ie tax increases)
11:26 - Obama - "The public is not paying close attention to the ins and out of how a Treasury auction goes."
11:28 - Obama - "I'd rather be talking about stuff that everybody welcomes like new programs or the NFL season getting resolved. Unfortunately, this is what's on our plate.
11:29 - Obama - "I think Speaker Boehner has been very sincere about doing something big. I think he'd like to do something big."
11:31 - Obama selling to Dems: "If you're a progressive who cares about (Social Security and Medicare), then we have an obligation to make sure they are sustainable over long term.
11:32 - Obama: "SS is not the source of our deficit problems."
11:34 - Obama - "I am willing to move in their direction in order to get something done...we have a system of government where everybody has to give a little
11:36 - Obama keeps using himself as an example of a wealthy person who wants to pay more taxes. I mean, he is a "bestselling author".....
11:38 - Obama makes the case that when he came into office state budgets were "hemorrhaging". First real mention of how bad things he inherited were...that was a major focus of earlier statements he has made.
11:41 - Obama at his most confrontational here...noting that Republicans jobs plan is getting deficit under control. "What's the hold up," he asks.
11:43 - Question #5: "What biz leaders is Obama talking to on debt deal?" Obama says, "We want to cut everybody else's stuff and we want to keep our stuff." -- Obama on biz community.
11:44 - Had heard this privately, Pres. Obama just said it publicly: business leaders tell POTUS they want a deal w/revenues. But won't say publicly. "They have been hesitant to be as straightforward as I'd like..."
11:46 - Obama - "We are going to get this done by August 2." -- Obama. NO mention of contingency plans if not...Obama translation: "I got this." I don't know why he feels so confident though.
11:46 - Question #6: Is Boehner in control of his caucus? Obama on Boehner: "A good man who wants to do right by his country." Obama suggests he wasn't mad when Boehner walked away from the table
11:49 - "This recession has been hard on everybody...it's harder on folks who've got less. Obama says he's "obsessed" with helping low-income families who "do the right thing."
Plinko said:
I was in high school. If we only taught classes that we thought would stick with 14-18 year olds we could shut down high schools altogether!
Also, I never specifically said high school. I would have personal finance classes from the time kids are able to do basic math, so 4th or 5th grade. Reinforce the lessons throughout the remainder of their education.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Dude Abides said:
Sports at school makes kids more likely to be active outside of school.
It's pretty simple!
To be fair, the way they treat sports/gym in the US and in Europe is wholly different. It feels more of encouragement and "everybody can participate at any local affiliate club" vibe in Europe, whereas sports and athletics are treated as an end-all "privilege" for the schools.
Not good enough to play football? Tough shit. Name me local clubs that accept any kid for cheap.
And that's the other thing... athletics and afterschool clubs are so damn expensive here. It's all subsidized by local governments and clubs in Europe, which makes it cheap for kids to participate.
For comparison, to play 7 weeks of non-school affiliated basketball costs around $50-70 per player. Add in shoes and jersey costs... that's a lot of money to spend. Not all parents can do that.
Not good enough to play football? Tough shit. Name me local clubs that accept any kid for cheap.
And that's the other thing... athletics and afterschool clubs are so damn expensive here. It's all subsidized by local governments and clubs in Europe, which makes it cheap for kids to participate.
For comparison, to play 7 weeks of non-school affiliated basketball costs around $50-70 per player. Add in shoes and jersey costs... that's a lot of money to spend. Not all parents can do that.
empty vessel
Member
Because he knows full well that Republican leverage is illusory. Whatever comes out of this will be a purely Democratic plan.
Aaron Strife
Banned
This is hardly a bad thing. But I agree with you.empty vessel said:
There will be much fewer Republicans willing to sign onto a debt ceiling raise than Democrats.
Tweet from PPP:
I take it that Matheson is leading Hatch.
Must be different in your district because that's not the experience I've had. Granted, freshman year they did want me on the football team and I never even tried out, but that was freshman year. If you want to get on varsity and what-not, good luck. Basketball, for a fact, have a limit of 12 or so players. That's a small number out of 100+ trying out -- more if you're at a larger school.Kosmo said:
reilo said:
Yeah, for basketball there are cuts at our high schools as well as other sports where you just can't have 100 guys on the team. But for Football or track, they take anybody and everybody. The only exception I can think of is some of the elite Catholic schools where football players are basically recruited, but then again if you aren't recruited, you pretty much know you won't be on the team any way.
Dude Abides
Banned
Ether_Snake said:
Not talking about sports, talking about gym class.
eznark said:
Yes it was. Gym is the only source of exercise for some students because they won't exercise anywhere else. You dig into semantics in order to avoid explaining how removing gym would improve students' health. Think about that for a second.
http://www.health.am/ab/more/obesity-boot-camps-not-the-answer/
Plumbob said:
1. No it isn't. Ending gym in school simply does not remove anyone's ability to exercise. That they won't does not mean that the opportunities do not exist.
2. I never said removing gym would improve the health of students, I simply said that gym is ineffective and there are better uses of time.
Kids can exercise on their own in infinite ways, it's much more difficult for them to teach themselves financial responsibility.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
eznark said:
Make 'gym' more effective then?
Cyan said:
I'm not insisting, but as complaints about capacity run rampant in public schools I would imagine there would be serious push back to just adding a course. Personally I'd remove music first, but gym is pointless as well.
And yes, reading/comprehending Suze Orman on the internet is exactly as easy as running around the block.
I am! By turning it into something useful!
So, Sebelius is going to release information about the requirements for the health insurance exchanges today in front of a hardware store that's been around for 90 years. Ironically though:
Capitol Hill Store Owner Is Both HHS Host and Health Law Skeptic
Capitol Hill Store Owner Is Both HHS Host and Health Law Skeptic
Gaborn said:
It would be hilarious if the store owner came out and said "What can I say, Obamacare is going to be great. After years of having to get creative to control healthcare premiums, now we'll be able to simply cut the government a check for $2,500 per employee and they can buy from the exchange."
If anyone doesn't think small business owners are going to do this, they are deluding themselves. They might not want to be first, but a lot are in line to be second.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Gaborn said:
So Medicare, Medicaid, and SS didn't work?
Kosmo said:
Definitely, there are going to be massive numbers of employers who won't offer health insurance anymore which will make the government's costs go up significantly on this boondoggle.
mckmas - depends on how you define "work" - medicare for example has been HUGELY over budget projections in terms of costs.
empty vessel
Member
Gaborn said:
That, at least, would be one of the few good things about the law, unintended as it may be.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Gaborn said:
Why won't those small businesses offer health care insurance anymore? And by work I mean do what it was intended to do. The gov't doesn't need to make a profit on SS and Medicare/Medicaid.
Kosmo said:
its definitely intended, as the law is clearly a trojan horse for universal health care. That and it will adjust something that should never have happened. Health insurance coupled to employment.
mckmas8808 said:
for a small business $2500 an employee is much cheaper then covering a portion of an employees health insurance.
aronnov reborn
Banned
mckmas8808 said:
It'll be cheaper for them to opt out and they wont be vilified either because the employees will still get it through obamacare?
mckmas8808 said:
Because their premiums (assuming most small businesses are underwritten, not self-funded) can be unpredictable if they have a member with large claims (premiums get adjusted year to year) and on average probably cost around $12k a year per employee. For $2,500 per employee, they are Scott-free of that obligation. Hell, they could even give every employee a $2K raise every year and be well under their old costs.
Great. Getting rid of employee-based health insurance and moving towards a UHC model would be the best thing to happen in this country in a long time.Kosmo said:
So, I laugh at you for thinking that people being pushed into the exchange is a bad thing.
mckmas8808 said:
What is their incentive to do so? They're required to pay for a certain level of care (if they're large enough, smaller businesses aren't even required to do that) and no more. So businesses that offer plans better than the government mandate have no incentive to keep the same plan and would have incentive to reduce their costs. Businesses that currently offer a low plan more or less in line with government costs don't have to deal with the paperwork of keeping track of employees on their plan, they can just pay the government to shunt them into a one size fits all system.
Mandating a minimum level of care is going to LEAD to that minimum level of care being the standard for most workers.
aronnov reborn
Banned
reilo said:
and with our economy we can go into even further debt to pay for it
Dude Abides
Banned
Gaborn said:
Just like most workers now earn minimum wage?
StopMakingSense
Member
aronnov reborn said:
? The employees would pay their way into the exchanges?
Dude Abides said:
Slightly different situation. Wages are a function basically of an employee's skillset, scarcity, and bargaining position. You can't offer multiple health insurance plans for employees in a small business based on skillset because that would be even more cost prohibitive.
StopMakingSense - LOL, the exchanges are heavily subsidized and not free. If more people enter the exchanges than projected (a very high likelihood according to medicare's actuary) then it's going to come out in higher costs to taxpayers.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Kosmo said:
So the question is why don't these same businesses decline to offer health care now since there's no penalty at the moment? Why did they offer health care in the 2000s or the 90s?
That why they could save the $12k a year and give their employees a $2k raise to shut them up?
aronnov reborn
Banned
reilo said:
well at least you were just laughing instead of laughing at me. that would have stung more.
Dude Abides
Banned
Gaborn said:
Yes, that will be true for some employers, but some employers will presumably offer better benefits to attract more desireable workers, so I don't see any reason to think that most workers will be offered the minimum required benefit. In fact, I'd expect employers to use health insurance as a basis to compete on compensation as the value to the employee is less transparent than straight wages or salary.
- Status