- Joined
- Aug 28, 2008
- Messages
- 15,483
- Reaction score
- 8,227
- Location
- North Texas
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Isn't that sad? His idea of someone "taking personal responsibility" is to make us pay for it.
I'd bet you were a champ at that old game "twister".
Getting people to take "personal responsibility" for their healthcare does not mean them being placed on Medicaid or having taxpayers pay most/some of the health insurance tab just for them existing. That's anything but taking personal responsibility.
I don't pretend to understand it all myself. But I do believe that Americans should contribute to their own healthcare in as much as they are able too. I am so glad that they have to, by law, now.
Now, if we could do something to address the "professional welfare," people in our society, we might be able to get somewhere.
In my widest dreams, I never thought it would be a democrat who would mandate people taking personal responsibility for their well being. That was always a republican kind of position to take. And yet, the republicans are the ones doing most of the whining.
Old school democrats seem to have become modern day republicans.
I have to say I'm beginning to wonder if this wasn't a set up? It was outsourced to a private firm, and even those that are accustomed to getting all their income from government contracts still seem to hate Obama, ACA, and resolving the budget crises with higher taxes on the rich. What better way to be pissy, than to sabotage the opening weeks of ACA.
This stuff happens to any website that gets too many hits. It will all be settled out eventually and it's really no big deal.
GTA 5's online component launched on the same day as the healthcare website and it's still having problems as well. This is a game that made a billion dollars in 3 days, and the online component launched 2 weeks after it initially launched. If Rockstar can't have a smooth roll out of their online component with such high traffic, then no one really can.
This stuff happens to any website that gets too many hits. It will all be settled out eventually and it's really no big deal.
GTA 5's online component launched on the same day as the healthcare website and it's still having problems as well. This is a game that made a billion dollars in 3 days, and the online component launched 2 weeks after it initially launched. If Rockstar can't have a smooth roll out of their online component with such high traffic, then no one really can.
If eBay and Amazon can do it, why can't the government?
I shutter to think how much money they have wasted letting some politician's brother-in-law have the contract for building this useless website.
Except I'm not an Obama supporter or
voter either time. I couldn't bring myself to vote for the lesser of evils. Glad the lesser of evils won, nonetheless
They are also blaming a Canadian company for the ballsup but why were they outsourcing this work when there are so many experts at this sort of thing in the US?
Tech firm is behind glitchy healthcare exchange; shares rise anyway - latimes.com
If you believe this then you have first an observation deficit, then you are arithmetically challenged, since you are unable to understand arithmetic, you lack ability to comprehend what you couldn't arithmetically compare. Hence your comment is completely retarded ignorant idiocy, a full and complete reflection of you.Why ? You're "glad" this Countries economy is hanging by a thread as millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet ?
5 years in and things are getting worse. The "lesser of two evils" was Jr Senator with a ego maniacal complex.
If you believe this then you have first an observation deficit, then you are arithmetically challenged, since you are unable to understand arithmetic, you lack ability to comprehend what you couldn't arithmetically compare. Hence your comment is completely retarded ignorant idiocy, a full and complete reflection of you.
But CBS News has learned the new "shop and browse" feature often comes with the wrong price tags.
Industry analysts, such as Jonathan Wu, point to how the website lumps people only into two broad categories: "49 or under" and "50 or older."
Wu said it's "incredibly misleading for people that are trying to get a sense of what they're paying."
Prices for everyone in the 49-or-under group are based on what a 27-year-old would pay. In the 50-or-older group, prices are based on what a 50-year-old would pay.
CBS News ran the numbers for a 48-year-old in Charlotte, N.C., ineligible for subsidies. According to HealthCare.gov, she would pay $231 a month, but the actual plan on Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina's website costs $360, more than 50 percent higher. The difference: Blue Cross and Blue Shield requests your birthday before providing more accurate estimates.
The numbers for older Americans are even more striking. A 62-year-old in Charlotte looking for the same basic plan would get a price estimate on the government website of $394. The actual price is $634.
Bet you thought that personal attack was clever, eh Ms. non voter?.....
If you believe this then you have first an
observation deficit, then you are arithmetically challenged, since you are unable to understand arithmetic, you lack ability to comprehend what you couldn't arithmetically compare. Hence your comment is completely retarded ignorant idiocy, a full and complete reflection of you.
Bet you thought that personal attack was clever, eh Ms. non voter?.....
It wasn't, it was actually standard fair from the likes of her ilk.
Just a bunch of general nonsense and no attempt to address my points specifically.
I actually wonder sometimes how many of these people are like that #natsecwonk guy...and what that says if they are. Sad.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?