Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 232 233 [234] 235 236 ... 3567

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 4241312 times)

Telgin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Professional Programmer
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3495 on: March 14, 2017, 07:22:20 pm »

The idea of opting out of health care [insurance] makes about as much sense as opting out of police or fire coverage.  Conceptually you can make an argument for it, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Actually, there are parts of the country where you can opt out of those, right?  Or at least fire coverage.  I seem to recall someone talking about a county where you had to pay the fire tax and if you didn't the fire department would merrily watch your house burn down and only make sure it didn't spread.  Been a long time ago.

Oh, what about being able to opt out of military coverage?
Logged
Through pain, I find wisdom.

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3496 on: March 14, 2017, 07:27:52 pm »

The whole opting out of Fire Coverage kind of had so many problems in those places.

It was kind of interesting in that... it kind of cost more money for someone to have a fire at a non-covered house.

---

Though one interesting thing I saw was meant as a joke...

This guy is watching the police be entirely incompetent around him and the police say something along the lines of "Well, we are paid by your taxes" and he goes "Well then I just won't pay my taxes" and then the police arrest him.

Kind of interesting how some systems sort of self-force themselves on you... with little recourse for when they go wrong.

A lot like some of these are a protection racket.
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 07:31:52 pm by Neonivek »
Logged

Akura

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3498 on: March 14, 2017, 08:36:51 pm »

Clever:


Tell me that's not real. Just making a wild guess here based on some estimation regarding the tax revenue increase vs cost, but I don't see how that can possibly work.

Actually, there are parts of the country where you can opt out of those, right?  Or at least fire coverage.  I seem to recall someone talking about a county where you had to pay the fire tax and if you didn't the fire department would merrily watch your house burn down and only make sure it didn't spread.  Been a long time ago.

I remember that story, what had happened was the area didn't have public fire service, but a private fire service did exist that required a regular fee to receive service. One person's house who wasn't paying for the service caught fire, the company showed up to protect the house of the neighbor who did pay for fire protection service but refused to put out the other guy's house. Even refused to sell the guy a subscription right there, which is probably the scummiest part.
Logged
Quote
They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I told them I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard.
... Yes, the hugs are for everyone.  No stabbing, though.  Just hugs.

redwallzyl

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3499 on: March 14, 2017, 08:40:01 pm »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/14/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

so we know his taxes now, some of them at least.
Logged

Max™

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CULL:SQUARE]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3500 on: March 14, 2017, 10:05:23 pm »

Besides the non-news of the taxes: https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/sec-price-cms-admin-verma-ltr.pdf

Not sure exactly what all that is, but it seems like a shitstorm's a-brewin.
Logged

MrRoboto75

  • Bay Watcher
  • Belongs in the Trash!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3501 on: March 14, 2017, 10:32:13 pm »

Quote from: NYTimes
“Trump’s return shows that he’s pushing tax changes that benefit multimillionaire heirs like him, not the middle class,” said Lily Batchelder, a tax law professor at New York University and former majority chief tax counsel for the Senate Finance Committee. “His proposal to repeal the A.M.T. would have slashed his own tax burden by $31 million, and his income tax rate would be lower than the average rate paid by families earning $75,000 to $100,000.”

What a shocker

A rich man using government to benefit rich men, how unprecedented.  No one could have predicted that.
Logged
I consume
I purchase
I consume again

nenjin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Inscrubtable Exhortations of the Soul
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3502 on: March 14, 2017, 11:23:51 pm »

Besides the non-news of the taxes: https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/sec-price-cms-admin-verma-ltr.pdf

Not sure exactly what all that is, but it seems like a shitstorm's a-brewin.

....did you read it?

Because it appears to be the opening move of dismantling Federal Medicaid administration, and making the states themselves primarily responsible for administering Medicaid services and, in fact, designing the programs. It starts talking about how they have a duty to provide the highest quality of service to Americans. Then it takes a direct stab at big government, top of the second paragraph, as the reason it can't do so. Then goes right into naming the ACA as the reason Medicaid is overburdened, (a "clear departure from the core, historical mission of the program.") then into how the Federal structure of Medicaid can't handle the vagaries and complexities of state health care needs. It goes on to say how one of their primary goals is to facilitate faster processing of waiver requests from states. I'll just quote the next bit:

Quote
Align Medicaid and Private Insurance Policies for Non-Disabled Adults. States may considering creating greater alignment between Medicaid's design and benefit structure with common features of commercial health insurance, to help working age, non-pregnant, non-disabled adults prepare for private coverage. These state-led reforms could include, as allowed by law:

Followed by some stuff you can read one way or the other. "Alternative benefit plans and cost-sharing models", HSAs, employer-sponsored health insurance options, "reasonable premiums", "appropriate protections for high-risk populations", more mentions about waivers.

It goes on to then extend a deadline for states to comply with the Home and Community Based Services rule, adopted January 16 2014. Here's this wonderful bit:

Quote
Additionally we will be examining ways in which we can improve our engagement with states on the implementation of the HCBS rule, including greater state involvement in the process of assessing compliance of specific settings."


So yeah. You can probably say a shitstorm is coming. They're going to basically just turn responsibility for Medicaid over to the states with HHS in an oversight role to make sure they meet "the right standards", and are promising to fast track waivers and exceptions on a case by case basis. Eager to work with states on that front, in fact. They're encouraging states to adopt common practices in the insurance industry to structure benefits of said Medicaid program, including charging premiums.

They're turning a federally funded program into a state handled affair and telling them to make money while doing it. They're promising the states a field day with Medicaid, on whom the cost and implementation of all this falls, and who apparently can just get a waiver from HHS if they can't meet compliance for one reason or another.

Isn't this along with Social Security like one of the pillars of the electorate you don't fuck with because it'll universally be hated? We have a federally funded program because states can't or won't provide a safety net for people. Now they're like "You can! Just do what private industry does! And if you can't, forgettaboutit."

On the plus side at least they're apparently doubling down on supporting states dealing with the Opiod Epidemic, specifically. So that's good I guess.....
« Last Edit: March 14, 2017, 11:49:20 pm by nenjin »
Logged
Cautivo del Milagro seamos, Penitente.
Quote from: Viktor Frankl
When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
Quote from: Sindain
Its kinda silly to complain that a friendly NPC isn't a well designed boss fight.
Quote from: Eric Blank
How will I cheese now assholes?
Quote from: MrRoboto75
Always spaghetti, never forghetti

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3503 on: March 14, 2017, 11:41:24 pm »

Quote from: NYTimes
“Trump’s return shows that he’s pushing tax changes that benefit multimillionaire heirs like him, not the middle class,” said Lily Batchelder, a tax law professor at New York University and former majority chief tax counsel for the Senate Finance Committee. “His proposal to repeal the A.M.T. would have slashed his own tax burden by $31 million, and his income tax rate would be lower than the average rate paid by families earning $75,000 to $100,000.”

What a shocker

A rich man using government to benefit rich men, how unprecedented.  No one could have predicted that.

And this is where all benefit of the doubt, every last shred that Trump could have ever collected... Disappears.
Logged

Max™

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CULL:SQUARE]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3504 on: March 15, 2017, 12:14:00 am »

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Isn't this along with Social Security like one of the pillars of the electorate you don't fuck with because it'll universally be hated? We have a federally funded program because states can't or won't provide a safety net for people. Now they're like "You can! Just do what private industry does! And if you can't, forgettaboutit."

On the plus side at least they're apparently doubling down on supporting states dealing with the Opiod Epidemic, specifically. So that's good I guess.....
I was quite distracted and glad someone got to figuring it out before I did, thanks! It seemed bad, but not quite as bad as your explanation suggests it actually is.

Also: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/cbo-health-care-congressional-republicans-214905
Quote from: The Politico Crew
However, in embracing the CBO’s long-run projection, they skipped over the short run: “In 2018 and 2019 … average premiums for single policyholders in the nongroup market [for those not covered by an employer or government program] would be 15 percent to 20 percent higher than under current law.” On top of that, CBO warns that older voters, who skew Republican, could get socked in the short and long run because “insurers would be allowed to generally charge five times more for older enrollees than younger ones rather than three times more as under current law.”

Your average Republican member of Congress cares a whole lot more about the cost of coverage in 2018 than in 2026. A 20 percent price spike, combined with the 50 percent jump in the number of uninsured—leading to charges that Republicans needlessly put health insurance out of reach of many working-class Americans—would be a devastating combination right before an election.
It's like, "yes, shoot yourselves in the foot, but first can you take them out of my lap?" I guess.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 04:30:06 am by Max™ »
Logged

misko27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Lawful Neutral; Prophet of Pestilence
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3505 on: March 15, 2017, 12:31:13 am »

Oh for usability's sake... No, no, no, fix that damned quote pyramid ziggurat you have there, posthaste.
Logged
The Age of Man is over. It is the Fire's turn now

alway

  • Bay Watcher
  • 🏳️‍⚧️
    • View Profile
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3507 on: March 15, 2017, 01:19:01 am »

Quote
"Some of the Obama administration rules were getting in the way of good strikes," said one U.S. official briefed on the matter.

Yes... THAT is the point.

That we are willing to sacrifice "good strikes" so that bad ones do not occur.

You know... like that Justice system you are part of that states that it is better that 10 guilty people go free than one innocent person punished.
Logged

wierd

  • Bay Watcher
  • I like to eat small children.
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3508 on: March 15, 2017, 01:20:28 am »

You have to understand something:

The concept that one should not use the threat of death as a motivational force does not occur easily to people in positions of power. In fact, they often consider the distaste for lethal force as a sign of weakness in their peers.

This is because most people who gravitate toward positions of power are sociopaths.


With that out of the way, what compelling reason is there for people in positions of power to NOT find the idea of 'push-button style, easy to use death robots that never question a kill order' gloriously desirable?  I sure cannot think of one.

That is why we, as the public who builds such things for these idiots, need to be the ones to say "no, we wont build those for you, no matter how much you ask us." 

the problem is that there is no shortage of people willing to sell everyone else out for a temporary advantage. (prisoner's dillema, meets tradgedy of the commons.)
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread: Russia scandal evolution edition
« Reply #3509 on: March 15, 2017, 03:31:36 am »

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 232 233 [234] 235 236 ... 3567