Support NeoGAF

[NYCmetsfan]

That's just them being anti-Obama because, Obama.

Obama allowed them to be who they are.
Neoconservatives are liberals in the sense they are concerned about changing the world rather than conserving it. Republicans went along because they're guy was president. Look to history. Republicans or more accurately conservatism has always been about having a giant military to scare people off but never to get involved in other people's problems. Isolationism has been huge in American history.

 

[Videoneon]

I don't understand the south park is libertarian idea. They make fun of everyone and I just think the fact they make fun of liberals is twisted to mean they disagree. I just think they are provocative.

Trey Parker is a registered libertarian. Matt Stone: " I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals." All I heard for about one month from some of my high school classmates was "Die hippie die!"

They don't necessarily only make fun of "liberals." Team America World Police lampooned neoconservativism. But then again of course, we've had the origins of neoconservativism come up often in this PoliGAF iteration. Others may want to comment on Book of Mormon, but Trey Parker is skeptical of the established religions.

It's not like non-libertarians can't find anything funny in it, though I haven't watched it in about six years. I just find the idea that there's strong libertarian appeal very believable, and the creators are both libertarian.

Is that why it smells like French fries in here? *lame bio diesel joke*

As much as I wish it were true it's not

hyurk hyurk =P

you actually reminded me of an article I read a while ago that said diesel fuel is on the rise. A very limited one IIRC, but better than the anemic status it's enjoyed since its introduction.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I really think you're underestimating the start of the art here. The technology has been entering our cars slowly for the last ten years already. Parking assist, cruise control, lane assist, these are features that you can already buy on cars today. The first completely-self-driving concept cars are being produced now. It's not by any means a stretch to expect consumer-level self-driving cars by the end of the decade.

I agree that humans will be required in self-driving cars -- for consumers. But there will be sound economic reasons to provide waivers for corporations, who generally have to carry insurance and assume liability for all company-driven cars in any case, and once you start down that road, it's all over. As soon as Zipcar gets a permit to move their cars without drivers, there's really no reason to buy a car ever again. Get on your phone, order one, wait ten minutes. (In the Bay Area, at least -- this is yet another market penetration question, but it's only a matter of time.)

I think a bigger push factor is insurance. If I can see my premiums drop because robot cars are far less likely to be in accidents, that'd certainly make me think about getting a driverless car (besides, I live in the worst place to commute in the country. I can only imagine that in optimal conditions my commute would be faster, safer, and more enjoyable if I can do something else.) I expect in 30 years we'll hit a point where the majority of cars (at least being sold) are primarily auto-pilot or have the functionality built-in.

Obama allowed them to be who they are.
Neoconservatives are liberals in the sense they are concerned about changing the world rather than conserving it. Republicans went along because they're guy was president. Look to history. Republicans or more accurately conservatism has always been about having a giant military to scare people off but never to get involved in other people's problems. Isolationism has been huge in American history.

I've always hated the liberal/conservative labels. It reminds me about how people automatically think if something's labeled "progressive", it's a good idea. The KKK were part of the Progressive Era, and that certainly wasn't to the benefit of our country.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

I've always hated the liberal/conservative labels. It reminds me about how people automatically think if something's labeled "progressive", it's a good idea. The KKK were part of the Progressive Era, and that certainly wasn't to the benefit of our country.

Were they apart of, or a backlash to the Progressive Era? Because there is nothing 'progressive' about the kkk at all.

 

[Fuchsdh]

Were they apart of, or a backlash to the Progressive Era? Because there is nothing 'progressive' about the kkk at all.

That's my point. You're using "progressive" wholly in a positive context. The Progressive Era believed in a lot about "improving" humanity--and stuff like eugenics and racial superiority was a part of that. After all the Nazis learned their tricks from California.

 

[PhoenixDark]

interesting...

Democrats push Reid to get more aggressive in shutdown battle

Senate Democrats are urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to be aggressive in the standoff over a government shutdown with House Republicans.

They say Reid should counter the House Republican government funding bill by not only stripping language defunding ObamaCare, but by increasing funding for the rest of the government.

“We’re going to try to get as high a CR level as we can get,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking member of the Democratic caucus, referring to the stop-gap spending measure. “We are not going to be held hostage.

“We think it should be higher than the $988 [billion] level, absolutely. But we’re not going to have a negotiation that deals with extraneous issues,” he added. “We’re going to negotiate to get as a high a level as possible.”

Senate Democratic sources say Reid could increase the funding level in the House-passed resolution by using the same floor procedure he’s expected to use to remove language defunding ObamaCare.

“He can also change the numbers,” said a Senate Democratic strategist.

Senators and aides say Reid will manage the House resolution in such a way to allow Democrats to revise it with a simple majority vote.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/323803-democrats-push-reid-to-get-aggressive-in-shutdown-fight-

A big "fuck you" to Cruz, plus an end of sequestration/increase in defense spending? What better way to get McCain on board.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

That's my point. You're using "progressive" wholly in a positive context. The Progressive Era believed in a lot about "improving" humanity--and stuff like eugenics and racial superiority was a part of that. After all the Nazis learned their tricks from California.

Ah okay I see what you're saying. I was a little confused initially.

 

[lednerg]

One of the best documentaries about the War on Drugs I've ever seen, The House I Live In, is now on Netflix Instant - (Trailer).

 

[Baraka in the White House]

interesting...

Democrats push Reid to get more aggressive in shutdown battle





http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/323803-democrats-push-reid-to-get-aggressive-in-shutdown-fight-

A big "fuck you" to Cruz, plus an end of sequestration/increase in defense spending? What better way to get McCain on board.

Harry Reid.

 

[zero shift]

This is late, but for anyone interested regarding Silicon Valley and Libertarianism--



I remember happening upon this topic months ago, with a nice hefty New Yorker article.

http://neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=593406

Best post in the thread:

Libertarianism is like religion. People take bits and pieces of it that make sense to them and hold onto them and disregard (or are ignorant to) the rest.

 

[ivysaur12]

interesting...

Democrats push Reid to get more aggressive in shutdown battle





http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/323803-democrats-push-reid-to-get-aggressive-in-shutdown-fight-

A big "fuck you" to Cruz, plus an end of sequestration/increase in defense spending? What better way to get McCain on board.

That would be nice.

 

[GhaleonEB]

interesting...

Democrats push Reid to get more aggressive in shutdown battle

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/323803-democrats-push-reid-to-get-aggressive-in-shutdown-fight-

A big "fuck you" to Cruz, plus an end of sequestration/increase in defense spending? What better way to get McCain on board.

This would be a welcome development; rather than let the GOP dictate the terms (status quo, or worse) it sounds like an effort to pull things back in the other direction.

 

[thepotatoman]

lol


here is a video of a self-driving car successfully handling stop-lights, pedestrians crossing and just about any other practical obstacle you can imagine

Wow, I did not realize.

I really think you're underestimating the start of the art here. The technology has been entering our cars slowly for the last ten years already. Parking assist, cruise control, lane assist, these are features that you can already buy on cars today. The first completely-self-driving concept cars are being produced now. It's not by any means a stretch to expect consumer-level self-driving cars by the end of the decade.

I agree that humans will be required in self-driving cars -- for consumers. But there will be sound economic reasons to provide waivers for corporations, who generally have to carry insurance and assume liability for all company-driven cars in any case, and once you start down that road, it's all over. As soon as Zipcar gets a permit to move their cars without drivers, there's really no reason to buy a car ever again. Get on your phone, order one, wait ten minutes. (In the Bay Area, at least -- this is yet another market penetration question, but it's only a matter of time.)

If I can afford one I'd still always buy my own car. I like knowing for sure my car is clean, or if it's dirty I at least know where that dirt came from. I also like the out and about storage space it gives, and I don't want to have to worry about the car running off with my paperwork or Vita still in it.

I figure if I'm still going to spend a lot of time in cars, it might as well be a car that is like an extension of my home and not a hotel, you know? Assuming it's about as affordable as cars today are.

This is late, but for anyone interested regarding Silicon Valley and Libertarianism--

I think a low barrier to entry, hackers, and pirates all do enough to make Silicon Valley not really need much regulation to protect consumers, and any regulation honestly is more likely to help businesses at the price of everyone else, but I think engineers forget how different competition works outside the tech sector or the fact that not everyone can be an engineer. That said, I still like them as allies against the authoritarianism, imperialism, and corporatism that is pretty rampant in our government.

 

[sc0la]

The car it's following seems to have some decals on it that might be helping, but yeah, very impressive. It's remarkably smooth with the computer driving.

The decals are on the driverless car. The following car is just to record from an exterior perspective.

The driverless car isn't following anyone.

 

[empty vessel]

The KKK were part of the Progressive Era, and that certainly wasn't to the benefit of our country.

That the KKK existed during a part of the Progressive Era does not make them part of the progressive movement in that era. And the reality is that the KKK did not really exist much during this period. Which is far from saying that there was no racism or that racism was not part of the progressive era.

See this book.

 

[Aaron Strife]

This would be a welcome development; rather than let the GOP dictate the terms (status quo, or worse) it sounds like an effort to pull things back in the other direction.

I think there'd be a temptation though to make the status quo the compromise.

Or, you know, they could try negotiating a real budget instead of this CR shit every three months.

 

[GhaleonEB]

I think there'd be a temptation though to make the status quo the compromise.

I didn't elaborate, but I suspect that's probably the goal. If the debate is between the status quo and what the GOP wants, it's worse than the status quo. If it's between a larger CR and the House GOP, the status quo would be the compromise. Really, I see that as the best outcome given the players. We're not going to get a bigger budget out of this.

 

[empty vessel]

This would be a welcome development; rather than let the GOP dictate the terms (status quo, or worse) it sounds like an effort to pull things back in the other direction.

Absolutely. I would love to see this from the Democrats. What's more, they might even be able to obtain it. Which would (finally) be a (small) step in the right direction for the country.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=683229

Some people...

 

[jamesinclair]

lol


here is a video of a self-driving car successfully handling stop-lights, pedestrians crossing and just about any other practical obstacle you can imagine

Still a lot to go.

Take construction. You know how sometimes on a two lane road, theyll close one lane, and a cop will wave you onto the "wrong" lane while another cop holds up traffic ahead?

How does an auto car handle that?

Or in construction, when a shoulder is paved as a detour, and obviously wont be on any map or have markings?

How about situations where the lane markings dont exist, are bad, or even worse, wrong?

I also liked how in the video the car stopped at the yield sign for like 2 minutes....wut

 

[sc0la]

Oh, man, I'm an idiot. Sorry.

No problem, the split view confused me at first too.

 

[ClassyPenguin]

Automation isn't a panacea.
Driverless cars still have a lot to go.
Right now the auto industry is working on how to integrate that technology realistically. So, lane departure, emergency braking, parking, driver alertness and traffic information. Then there is the problem with at scale management, such as the busy highways of Los Angeles. The tech isn't there just right now and won't be for a couple decades.

 

[gcubed]

In today's "politician completely loses it on Twitter" news...

What. The. Fuck.

 

[VanMardigan]

Ah, he was a just a volunteer. I thought he was an elected official.

 

[Diablos]

Biden would crush Christie in a debate. Christie would blow his top if he had to debate Biden, all Biden would have to do is wear that smirk he had when he debated Ryan and it would drive Christie into a fit of rage.

Numbers like these are pointless until people actually start campaigning, Christie has the sort of personality that only plays in the NE. He's too much of a dick for the rest of the country.

Christie is pretty popular. If he can win big in the NE, you know he'd get the south and some of the midwest... it would probably be enough. Florida would probably tilt towards him too. I don't think anyone should be writing him off. If he gets through the primary Dems have a real rival on their hands.

 

[The Librarian]

In today's "politician completely loses it on Twitter" news...

He's not a politician, and he has since been fired. We had a thread on this.

 

[Jason's Ultimatum]

If someone has healthcare provided by their employer, can they drop the coverage and go on Obamacare?

Also, is that Kaiser calculator pretty accurate? I'd only have to pay $4.97 a month, but I think that's for the bronze plan. My question is, how much would I pay if I have a $70,000 medical bill?

Thanks

 

[Link]

He's not a politician, and he has since been fired. We had a thread on this.

If he were a Republican, he'd get a promotion and a fanbase.

 

[The Librarian]

I think I need to stop following Amanda Carpenter for the sake of my blood pressure.

 

[Incognito]

LOL @ Ted Cruz declaring on Fox News that a vote against the CR filibuster is a vote for Obamacare! Senate Goppers are frothing in anger and Chris Wallace mentioned before the interview that he was given oppo research, by fellow GOP figures, to use against Cruz.

 

[The Technomancer]

LOL @ Ted Cruz declaring on Fox News that a vote against the CR filibuster is a vote for Obamacare! Senate Goppers are frothing in anger and Chris Wallace mentioned before the interview that he was given oppo research, by fellow GOP figures, to use against Cruz.

This is glorious

 

[GhaleonEB]

If someone has healthcare provided by their employer, can they drop the coverage and go on Obamacare?

Also, is that Kaiser calculator pretty accurate? I'd only have to pay $4.97 a month, but I think that's for the bronze plan. My question is, how much would I pay if I have a $70,000 medical bill?

Thanks

That will depend on the plan you choose. In general a Bronze plan will have a lower premium, but will cover a smaller % of medical expenses. To get a really accurate estimate, you'd need to see the benefits summary (example: go here and click on the first PDF). You can ballpark it by assuming that the you'd pay your out of pocket maximum for that kind of a bill, assuming everything was covered. I think that varies from plan to plan, state to state.

 

[PhoenixDark]

LOL @ Ted Cruz declaring on Fox News that a vote against the CR filibuster is a vote for Obamacare! Senate Goppers are frothing in anger and Chris Wallace mentioned before the interview that he was given oppo research, by fellow GOP figures, to use against Cruz.

So he's going to vote against the House bill he supports. He's claiming "not long ago" the votes weren't there to defund Obamacare in the House of Representatives. The delusion is blatantly deceptive. This isn't about making some last stand on a hill, it's about posturing. When he loses this, he'll again slam his colleagues and further alienate himself from the republican establishment.

I will say this: unlike Bachman, he's very good at bullshitting, if you don't know the bullshit. Now he's claiming a government shutdown would shut down the military. Looking at his face during the Fox interview, he's LOVING this.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

LOL @ Ted Cruz declaring on Fox News that a vote against the CR filibuster is a vote for Obamacare! Senate Goppers are frothing in anger and Chris Wallace mentioned before the interview that he was given oppo research, by fellow GOP figures, to use against Cruz.

Of course they're pissed. They're now being forced to vote for the stupid filibuster or they'll be painted as voting for Obamacare. Also if they vote for a filibuster and send nothing back to the house it'd be clear who's shutting the government down. Senate republicans hate that he's going over leadership's head (and McConnell has got to hate him the most for putting him in this spot due to his re-election primary challenge, either way he votes he'll be hit) . They just want to be done with this whole crap.

I'm also of the opinion Cruz isn't serious about running for president I thought he was just going for the crazy vote but no he's a joke. Palin just came out with and editorial in support of Cruz and his office is promoting it. He and her are part of the scamming of conservatives: pretend to the base you can do something, ask for money, do nothing but pontificate about true conservative and rino betrayal on Fox.

 

[Chichikov]

LOL @ Ted Cruz declaring on Fox News that a vote against the CR filibuster is a vote for Obamacare! Senate Goppers are frothing in anger and Chris Wallace mentioned before the interview that he was given oppo research, by fellow GOP figures, to use against Cruz.

We used to have a saying back home "political jokes are funny until they are in office" (or something to that effect, in Yiddish Hebrew, it sounds better).

 

[Diablos]

Pelosi phones it in: Says Hillary would be the best-prepared President we've had in in the past 30 years basically. She thinks that Obama, Dubya (duh), and Bill Clinton were not as well-prepared as her at this point in time. I can't say that I think she is dead wrong on that. Obama has been a great President but Hillary's experience in dealing with the scumbags in DC would have probably helped us a bit more through this tough slog right now. But frankly, it's hard to pin that on Obama because it's really not his fault that the GOP consists of a bunch of uberconservative racist pigs who are hellbent on trolling the progress of our economic and social well-being for as long as possible. I am a rational human being and it is dumb to take it out on the President not being as much of a DC insider at the time of his inauguration as Hillary was. It shouldn't matter. What should matter is people not acknowledging how toxic the GOP is to this country and it's a moral obscenity that anyone gives a damn about what these loons have to say, regardless of how flawed Dems may be at times.

Honestly, Obama with Hillary succeeding him is the best thing we can ask for. I say this because:

-It was really Obama's time in 2008. Obama fever, as we all witnessed, was relatively short-lived and that should come as no surprise. Being that he is tied to Illinois, even as a Senator I think he would have been prone to ongoing controversy that would have ultimately brought him down enough to hurt his credibility in a future Presidential bid. I am sure he could have stayed in the Senate for 20+ years though, if he wanted. The only exception I can think of is if Hillary would have chosen him as VP, but I sincerely doubt that would have happened. A woman and African-American on the ticket? Not so sure if a lot of people would have gone for that (sadly), not to mention all the rumors and existing controversy about Obama, while perhaps not made as rampant because he'd be at the bottom of the ticket, could have proven to be a bit of a nuisance for Hillary, i.e. Rev. Wright. Or dumb racist folks just screaming from the top of their lungs that he is a radical Muslim not born in the US, etc. She probably would've had to drop him.

-I don't think Hillary would have fought as hard for things like health care, stopping the US auto industry from crashing and burning, and repealing DADT. We desperately needed that however. Thanks to Obama that will be in place, and there is no way she'd touch it, unless it would be to make PPACA better for example.

-Obama paved the way for the idea that someone, anyone other than a wrinkly old white dude can run for the Presidency. That helps any other non-white/non-male candidate immensely, even if they don't realize it (hi, Marco Rubio).

-Last but not least, his Presidential campaign is formidable. Democrats are fortunate to have the political powerhouse that is Organizing for America in their pockets if they want it. Hillary would be wise to learn from what they did and apply it to her campaign instead of listening to noobs like Mark Penn. Hopefully she has come to her senses by now.

 

[Piecake]

If someone has healthcare provided by their employer, can they drop the coverage and go on Obamacare?

Also, is that Kaiser calculator pretty accurate? I'd only have to pay $4.97 a month, but I think that's for the bronze plan. My question is, how much would I pay if I have a $70,000 medical bill?

Thanks

Anyone can get Obamacare coverage. However, you will not get obamacare subsidies if your employer provides healthcare coverage. Bronze plan is 60% of medical bills. Gold is 90% of medical bills. Not totally sure how that exactly works out, but I think that simply means a high deductable for bronze plans so if you ahve a massive medical bill it will likely cost you less that 60% of that 70k.

I am assuming that 5 bucks a month is with subsidies. You aint getting that if you can get health care through your employer. That is the main reason why Trader joes dropped their health care coverage for part time employees and simply gave them 500 bucks. It would be a lot cheaper and better for the majority of those people that they do it that way. For the business too actually.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Pelosi phones it in: Says Hillary would be the best-prepared President we've had in in the past 30 years basically. She thinks that Obama, Dubya (duh), and Bill Clinton were not as well-prepared as her at this point in time. I can't say that I think she is dead wrong on that. Obama has been a great President but Hillary's experience in dealing with the scumbags in DC would have probably helped us a bit more through this tough slog right now. But frankly, it's hard to pin that on Obama because it's really not his fault that the GOP consists of a bunch of uberconservative racist pigs who are hellbent on trolling the progress of our economic and social well-being for as long as possible. I am a rational human being and it is dumb to take it out on the President not being as much of a DC insider at the time of his inauguration as Hillary was. It shouldn't matter. What should matter is people not acknowledging how toxic the GOP is to this country and it's a moral obscenity that anyone gives a damn about what these loons have to say, regardless of how flawed Dems may be at times.

Honestly, Obama with Hillary succeeding him is the best thing we can ask for. I say this because:

-It was really Obama's time in 2008. Obama fever, as we all witnessed, was relatively short-lived and that should come as no surprise. Being that he is tied to Illinois, even as a Senator I think he would have been prone to ongoing controversy that would have ultimately brought him down enough to hurt his credibility in a future Presidential bid. I am sure he could have stayed in the Senate for 20+ years though, if he wanted. The only exception I can think of is if Hillary would have chosen him as VP, but I sincerely doubt that would have happened. A woman and African-American on the ticket? Not so sure if a lot of people would have gone for that (sadly), not to mention all the rumors and existing controversy about Obama, while perhaps not made as rampant because he'd be at the bottom of the ticket, could have proven to be a bit of a nuisance for Hillary, i.e. Rev. Wright. Or dumb racist folks just screaming from the top of their lungs that he is a radical Muslim not born in the US, etc. She probably would've had to drop him.

-I don't think Hillary would have fought as hard for things like health care, stopping the US auto industry from crashing and burning, and repealing DADT. We desperately needed that however. Thanks to Obama that will be in place, and there is no way she'd touch it, unless it would be to make PPACA better for example.

-Obama paved the way for the idea that someone, anyone other than a wrinkly old white dude can run for the Presidency. That helps any other non-white/non-male candidate immensely, even if they don't realize it (hi, Marco Rubio).

-Last but not least, his Presidential campaign is formidable. Democrats are fortunate to have the political powerhouse that is Organizing for America in their pockets if they want it. Hillary would be wise to learn from what they did and apply it to her campaign instead of listening to noobs like Mark Penn. Hopefully she has come to her senses by now.

Basically, if Hillary becomes President in 2016, the GOP as we know it essentially will be buried and the final nail in the coffin for the party.

These assholes need to be kept as far away from the White House as possible, until they regain some of their sanity.

 

[gcubed]

Basically, if Hillary becomes President in 2016, the GOP as we know it essentially will be buried and the final nail in the coffin for the party.

These assholes need to be kept as far away from the White House as possible, until they regain some of their sanity.

I cherish the thought of the bitterness of the GOP with another Clinton in the White House

 

[Chumly]

Figured GAF would find this amusing. Nebraska uncovers massive waste after auditing brilliant GOP programs. Considering the massive failure so far of privatizing foster care in Nebraska nothing surprises me.


LINK

LINCOLN — More than half of Nebraskans who got state help paying for private insurance have been dropped from a Medicaid-related program following a critical audit.

But most of those people remain eligible for regular Medicaid coverage, in which the state pays for their medical care.

State Medicaid officials reviewed all 455 people participating in the program after State Auditor Mike Foley raised questions about its operations. The reviews were completed in July.

As of Wednesday, 236 people have been removed from the program. Officials had determined that it was not cost-effective to continue buying private insurance for 207 of those participants, said Russ Reno, a spokesman for the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.

Another 29 people were dropped for other reasons, such as no longer qualifying for Medicaid, he said.

Reno said 36 people have appeals pending over the decision to drop them from the program.

He said Nebraska instituted the Health Insurance Premium Payment program as a cost-saving measure.

It uses state and federal funds to pay insurance premiums for people who would otherwise qualify for Medicaid.

The program is intended to be used only when it is less expensive to pay for private insurance premiums, deductibles and co-payments than to pay for a person's care through Medicaid.
.

Foley detailed several failings of the program in a May audit. He said his staff found “gross mismanagement” and “serious financial discrepancies” in the 19-year-old program

The audit found HHS had failed to adequately check and document whether all of the program participants were eligible.

Foley said that failure called into question all $6.5 million worth of payments made from July 1, 2010, through Feb. 5 of this year, the period covered by the audit.

In one case, HHS paid more than $265,000 in premiums for a participant whose care would have been cheaper to provide through Medicaid.

The audit also found errors in the premium payments made for 53 of 70 participants whose cases were examined, a rate that Foley called “extraordinarily high.”

Foley criticized HHS for putting the program in the hands of a relatively low-level employee who was not well-compensated, well-trained or well-supervised.

Along with the reviews, HHS officials replaced the program administrator.

Kerry Winterer, the department CEO, also ordered division directors to review all programs to make sure they comply with state and federal laws and regulations.

Anyone who has had to deal with pretty much any service that Nebraska has know how understaffed and crappy it is.

 

[zero shift]

 

[The Librarian]

Oh hey look at that housewife.

Boy do I miss the times when I could only strive to be a good housewife.

 

[Piecake]

wait, what? Average full-time wage? What does that mean and how did they calculate that? Do they mean per hour or what? And they averaged it by taking the mean? They stoopid?

 

[Piecake]

wait, what? Average full-time wage? What does that mean and how did they calculate that? Do they mean per hour or what? And they averaged it by taking the mean? They stoopid?

Eh, nvm. Guess i was surprised everything was just so low in the 60s. Though 60s wage would be a lot less susceptible to outliers than now

 

[sc0la]

If someone has healthcare provided by their employer, can they drop the coverage and go on Obamacare?

Also, is that Kaiser calculator pretty accurate? I'd only have to pay $4.97 a month, but I think that's for the bronze plan. My question is, how much would I pay if I have a $70,000 medical bill?

Thanks

Sure, they however may not be eligible for subsidies since there is an employee sponsored plan available (Need some clarification on this, you may still qualify for subsidies if the employer plan still costs more yhan 9% of your income). I believe this is honor system and self reported but you might get pwned if you were audited.

Also bear in mind your employer may be contributing to your premium and many will not offer other compensation in place of this. Ask your employer how much their contribution to your monthly premium is, and if they would pay you this amount if you decline employer coverage (this is extremely uncommon)

 

[zero shift]

wait, what? Average full-time wage? What does that mean and how did they calculate that? Do they mean per hour or what? And they averaged it by taking the mean? They stoopid?

Eh, nvm. Guess i was surprised everything was just so low in the 60s. Though 60s wage would be a lot less susceptible to outliers than now

Look at it as in everything that is higher than 27 is more expensive in todays money than it was in 1960s money, while everything less is the opposite. With the exception of food clothes and car payments things are much more expensive. This also does not include gas for the car.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Pelosi phones it in: Says Hillary would be the best-prepared President we've had in in the past 30 years basically. She thinks that Obama, Dubya (duh), and Bill Clinton were not as well-prepared as her at this point in time. I can't say that I think she is dead wrong on that. Obama has been a great President but Hillary's experience in dealing with the scumbags in DC would have probably helped us a bit more through this tough slog right now. But frankly, it's hard to pin that on Obama because it's really not his fault that the GOP consists of a bunch of uberconservative racist pigs who are hellbent on trolling the progress of our economic and social well-being for as long as possible. I am a rational human being and it is dumb to take it out on the President not being as much of a DC insider at the time of his inauguration as Hillary was. It shouldn't matter. What should matter is people not acknowledging how toxic the GOP is to this country and it's a moral obscenity that anyone gives a damn about what these loons have to say, regardless of how flawed Dems may be at times.

Honestly, Obama with Hillary succeeding him is the best thing we can ask for. I say this because:

-It was really Obama's time in 2008. Obama fever, as we all witnessed, was relatively short-lived and that should come as no surprise. Being that he is tied to Illinois, even as a Senator I think he would have been prone to ongoing controversy that would have ultimately brought him down enough to hurt his credibility in a future Presidential bid. I am sure he could have stayed in the Senate for 20+ years though, if he wanted. The only exception I can think of is if Hillary would have chosen him as VP, but I sincerely doubt that would have happened. A woman and African-American on the ticket? Not so sure if a lot of people would have gone for that (sadly), not to mention all the rumors and existing controversy about Obama, while perhaps not made as rampant because he'd be at the bottom of the ticket, could have proven to be a bit of a nuisance for Hillary, i.e. Rev. Wright. Or dumb racist folks just screaming from the top of their lungs that he is a radical Muslim not born in the US, etc. She probably would've had to drop him.

-I don't think Hillary would have fought as hard for things like health care, stopping the US auto industry from crashing and burning, and repealing DADT. We desperately needed that however. Thanks to Obama that will be in place, and there is no way she'd touch it, unless it would be to make PPACA better for example.

-Obama paved the way for the idea that someone, anyone other than a wrinkly old white dude can run for the Presidency. That helps any other non-white/non-male candidate immensely, even if they don't realize it (hi, Marco Rubio).

-Last but not least, his Presidential campaign is formidable. Democrats are fortunate to have the political powerhouse that is Organizing for America in their pockets if they want it. Hillary would be wise to learn from what they did and apply it to her campaign instead of listening to noobs like Mark Penn. Hopefully she has come to her senses by now.

How is Obama a "great" president, I'm curious.

Personally I think Hillary's 2007/2008 argument about Obama has been proven right over the last five years. Republicans haven't been "loyal opposition" for decades. This level of obstruction may be new, but they attempted to hamstring Bill Clinton as well.

It was pretty obvious from the beginning too. Obama traveled to the hill to sell the stimulus to House republicans, a nearly unprecedented act for non-television presidents. The minute he ended his presentation, he was told none of them would support his plan. That should have been the tell-tell sign. Instead a lot of the stimulus was wasted on tax cuts that didn't seem to do anything. I realize he couldn't get a trillion dollar stimulus, but I would have rather had an 830b stimulus that was all stimulus.

I'm not going to further re-litigate the past by discussing the massive amount of time wasted chasing "bipartisan" agreements on healthcare. Needless to say I don't think Hillary would have been naive enough to expect republican support for either a stimulus bill or a healthcare bill.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Obama is the best we could have hoped for in a crappy, stagnant, visionless time. I don't see how Hillary, even more reviled by the GOP and with decades of baggage, could have done better.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Obama is the best we could have hoped for in a crappy, stagnant, visionless time. I don't see how Hillary, even more reviled by the GOP and with decades of baggage, could have done better.

Outside of maybe a few scenarios, she wouldn't have.

Obama's election sped up the process of the demise of the GOP in its current state as it brought their blatant racism to the forefrront.

Had Hillary been elected, not so much, they could've held out for a decade or so, possibly two.

That, and had Hillary won first, Obama wouldn't be able to swoop in 8 years later after her presidency, unlike vice versa.

 

[Sibylus]

Obama is the best we could have hoped for in a crappy, stagnant, visionless time.

Nope. But I guess that's the outcome if Americans lose their nerve and keep wasting votes on the same screwups.