开云体育

This is going to be more of a sarcasm comment than anything else, most likely not worthy of a reply, but here it is. I find it interesting that we need to setup exchanges to verify peoples identify and status through a government funded database when we keep saying that doing the same thing to validate voters is bad, biased, racial etc. Wouldn't people have the same issue whether it be for health care or voting and wouldn't it be the same negatives? I need an id to fish, I need an id to drive, I need and id to open a bank acoount, have health care but not one to vote the people who create all these other things. And of course the idea of stopping fraud doesn't hold water either since the general statement around voting without id is that we have no basis for assuming or proving fraud. With no id we would have no basis for fraud on our healthcare, we should simply trust everyone.

Your post shows how clueless you are about this issue, Dino. For many people, it's got nothing to do with being serious about voting and it's not as simple as going to the DMV on your lunch break. States like NC and TX have been creating as many hurdles as they can to be able to get a photo ID. In order to get that, you need other ID, such as a birth certificate. Many Americans, especially older ones, don't have what the state considers a valid birth certificate because they were born in rural areas and at home, rather than a hospital. That was very common decades ago. In Texas, many people have to drive up to 250 miles to get to a DMV office, as only about 1/3 of the counties have a DMV office. That's an 8-hour round trip. And if you don't bring all the required documentation, you get to do it all over again. Many older people, or people who are in poor health, or who don't drive, simply can't do it. And that's exactly what the Republicans want.

OK, now tell us what ya did at IBM! http://inexperiencetalking.wordpress.com/resume/

? ? Does it get any more Union than a Hoffa, with the exception of Richard Trumka? ?James Hoffa doesn't want Obama care which was shown in those links?that?were critiqued.? Isn't that Union?and tell tale sign enough for?the well informed communists/socialist/progressives in our government and journalistic cronies and maybe more than half of our unwashed masses? ? Socialism / Progressivism is the new Communism its just wrapped up with a sexy bow and it has sparkly things to distract.? The unwashed masses might not want socialism if they were not singing about said?elected official?in our elementary schools. This winning policy?recently brought us the out come we call?Detroit.? "Outlie" that. ? I am not a fan of Wall St types either.?? If you have lost money I am sorry to hear that.? My family was impacted by the?1987 correction as well as 2000.? But we?"individually" are ultimately responsible for our own "purses".? And I want my purse to get me some new golf clubs not pay for someone else's?cell phone,?flat panel or health care. ? It is Wall Street that keeps the Business of Business running around the world even if health care and Pensions and 401Ks are going to Zero.?? It is?Capitalism?that pays the bills as well as the government entitlements commmunists/socialist/progressives?want.?? Government doesn't create anything or create new private sector jobs or?inventories and stuff like that, right?? It just takes what is ours.? Like they took the Ark of the Covenant in Indiana Jones.? (Just kidding).?? ? No I am not.? I would be very impressed to see the Ark though if any one here has "connections". ? I could be wrong.? Like it really matters here.?? ? ?:-)?? ? ? ________________________________

No, I'm not a communist. I'm representative of the American public, in general - the same public that agreed with the TVA - the only way many rural Americans got affordable electricity, because of subsidies from wealthier Americans. The same public that overwhelmingly supports local fire departments, and good roads, and public schools and parks and libraries, etc, etc. The same public that supports Social Security and Medicare. We're a nation that's a mixture of socialism and captalism. If you had a clue about what you were talking about, you'd know that it's socialism, not communism. If you don't like living in a nation that's a strong mixture of socialism and captalism, then you should move elsewhere, because the vast majority of Americans are very happy with that mix - in fact, most of them would prefer that we have more socialism and less laissez faire capitalism - the stuff that's made banks and hedge fund managers so rich and left most of the rest of us off the gravy train. You're the outlier here, not me. Anecdotal info about how in a FEW cases, it's better to travel to another country for health care isn't evidence that everything about the care in the other nation is perfect for every resident of that country. Yet you seem to be under the delusion that it is. Yes, in a very few cases, Canadians DO travel to the USA for health care, but for the most part, they are quite happy with their heathcare system, and they don't have millions of people left out in the cold without coverages like we have here in the USA. If people in the USA who have an issue with our healthcare system could resolve those issues by travelling to another nation, we'd have a lot more people going to Canada than we have Canadians coming here. Yet you think that your argument is a winning one. I'm not surprised. So, now to your totally disingenuous arguments below. 1. There is an issue that some unions with healthcare plans that are called "non-profit" are having. They don't want an exemption from Obamacare. They don't want to be denied participation in the healthcare exchanges, and right now that's what might happen. You might want to read the link that includes the whole text of their letter to the Obama Administration, instead of the cherry-picked version your rightwing blog link chose to go with. They say they still support the effort - just that it needs to be tweaked. 2. The second link is simply another recapping of the same issue, and again, unions like the bill - they just feel like they're being disadvantaged by one part of the bill, and they want it fixed. They don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. 3. And, not surprisingly, the 3rd link is about the same exact topic - did you really not understand that it's not 3 separate issues? 4 & 5. Same thing, 4th and 5th verse. Really? 6. Finally, a second topic, but townhall.com - really? REALLY? We DO need young people who've been forgoing coverage to sign up. That's not a new issue. And acting as though advertising that need is a sign of desperation is ludicrous - but exactly what I'd expect from you. 7. And a FoxBusiness poll? A cable network that has virtually no audience? Really? If people hadn't been so misinformed by those on the right, they wouldn't be so reluctant to sign up. It's not because Obamacare is a bad plan. It's the best we could get because the Dems were trying to be conciliatory towards the Republicans - that's why it's so much like what Republicans for the past 2 decades have said that they wanted, because the Democrats were hoping that the Republicans could and would act in a bipartisan fashion if the Democrats did too. Try harder next time - this was way too easy.

Well, uh, the people who paid more when parents added their adult children to their policies are the parents themselves. Since additional person(s) were covered, they paid additional premiums. But they got something they wanted in return: HEALTH INSURANCE ! Oh, the tragedy! They had to actually PAY for it!!!! And it was all voluntary! Since the majority of young adults are healthy and can be expected to have few claims, the premiums their parents pay are most likely helping to keep the cost lower for everyone else. Oh, what a tragedy!! If you can prove otherwise, please do so.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/07/19/union-fears-destructive-consequences-from-obamacare/?mod=WSJBlog Soooo glad I never joined a union... This is a bad re-distribution of wealth for sure.

A few more in Florida will have to pay more: (non-cropped) http://health.wusf.usf.edu/post/30-rate-hike-individual-market

It may actually be better to lower your income somehow, ACA Subsidy Cliff May Incentivize Some To Earn Less !!! Some Scenarios Using Actual State Exchange Data: http://www.valuepenguin.com/2013/07/aca-subsidy-cliff-may-incentivize-working-less The introduction of ACA subsidies to help people buy insurance on the individual market creates a number of economic incentives when it comes to income. In particular is the phase-out of all subsidies for households once their income surpasses 400% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). Getting a raise or putting in more hours beyond the FPL threshold may actually result in less take-home income for the household.

I keep seeing notes posted from "no_reply@..." When I Google the email I see a bunch of scam warnings plus searching the membership of this yahoo group I get: (No members matching 'no_reply@...') So how is this person posting? I see the same email in many other IBM yahoo groups also. Doesn't this bother anyone?

29 seconds of fun watching screwed-up MSNBC hosts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LcXgabvQVk Makes me wish we could start sharing 30-second links to burqa-free videos over on YouTube about how we really feel! Limit one per hour.

Best Buy offers The iPad Commode Caddy for iPad + Roll Holder <http://dealnews.com/lw/artclick.html?2,807897,4262691> , model no. PAD-TSB for $39.98 with free shipping. (Amazon <http://dealnews.com/lw/artclick.html?2,807897,4262694> and B&H Photo Video <http://dealnews.com/lw/artclick.html?2,807897,4262697> have it for a penny more). That's tied with last month's mention and the lowest total price we could find by $7. It can hold second- to fourth-generation iPads with its flexible 10" gooseneck. It also features a snappable paper roll tube. Want something to put on it? Scott Products has a roll of Scott Extra Soft Toilet Paper <http://dealnews.com/lw/artclick.html?2,807897,4262703> for free when you fill out a short form <http://dealnews.com/lw/artclick.html?2,807897,4262703> . http://dealnews.com/The-iPad-Commode-Caddy-for-iPad-w-Roll-Holder-for-40&#92; -free-shipping/807897.html

Wow, interesting and you see I'd agree with you for the most part. However the entire "womans right to her own body above everything else crowd" has stated it is a medical fact that the thing in the womb is a fetus, not a child, not a human and it has no rights. Of course the other camp states it as a fact that the child in the womb is an innocent human and as the most defenseless among us has the right equal or greater protections than the mother. Both state fact, you will never get them to move from their stand. This is but one simple example of "facts" which are not facts. Most everything in this string that started the whole discussion is opinion based upon an individuals particular preference and the selective facts they choose to use to form that stand.

ACA doesn't apply to a companies retiree medical?plan, only to the current employees.? I remember reading that somewhere and being very disappointed so this discussion for those already retired is moot.?

I don't believe I ever said "very few people will pay more because [of] Obamacare." You must have me confused with someone else. Yes, parents who add additional people (i.e. children) to their coverage will pay more. But what did you expect? That this would somehow be free? Obamacare has never made such a promise. I'm not sure what you mean when you say: What I am saying is that people who add children to their policies will pay more because they are covering more people. I am not saying that this will result in people without children paying more. Your mind must be very scrambled if you can't understand this. And I'm still waiting for you to post some facts to support your claims that everyone will pay more because of parents adding adult children to their coverage.

I cannot believe this has happened: http://www.naturalnews.com/041397_Obamacare_health_insurance_small_businesses.html One of the "Affordable" Care Act's most recent casualties is Anthem Blue Cross, which has announced it will shun California's small-business health insurance market, which the Los Angeles Times describes as a "a potential setback in the state's rollout of the federal healthcare law."

http://dealnews.com/c40/Store-Events/ Updated real often. Last week I had a 64-cent Arby's sandwich.

You should be aware that while it is true that IBM provide $7K annually to your retiree medical ($3,500 if you are Medicare-eligible), it is a worthless benefit. They group you with only retired employees who have a very high experience of medical bills. You are not in the general employee pool. As such, your cost is higher than it would be if you went out and bought private insurance that was not subsidized. Don't worry about losing this benefit. It has no value unless you have a severe medical condition and cannot otherwise get insurance. Regards, Rich Waksman 93 Deerfield Lane North Pleasantville, NY 10570 (914) 747-0281

https://advisors.vanguard.com/VGApp/iip/site/advisor/analysistools/productcomp?sf535257=1