Wait.... what's wrong with "Obamacare"?

[Wilikon]

I never spelled Obama 0Bama... You did.

99.9% of people never see a zero, but a O. The same .1% who can see the zero are the same people who have a problem with the image of 0bama, a half black man, as a rodeo clown or a clown.

You are free to call me out all you want but my answer to you was very clear. I have never been to a US public school so maybe I would need to readjust the way I write for some people here.

Now I'm thoroughly lost as to what you're talking about. There are roughly 40 instances of "0bama" appearing in this thread. All of them were written by you, or appear when people quote you, up until the point I asked you why you spell his name with a 0. Then you got crazy with nonsense.

Yes. 0bama. Not 0Bama.

Only 40 instances? I need to work harder...  

Ah I see! You got me on a technicality. That is a well-scored point, but my question remains. Is it supposed to be a slight?

I do not believe it was a well-scored point and I do not believe writing 0bama or Obama or obama or OBama makes any kind of difference.

Instead of linking an image like this:


... I just write 0bama. It is not something I invented either. Pretty old. Just as something like this:


Obviously the thread is about if 0bamacare is better than the invention of slice bread or an abomination. Some people think it is great, others keep looking into the abyss of the number zero and expect an explanation to why Wilikon writes 0bamacare with a zero... No one cares, but everyone, including the ones who hate my posts, gets it...

[1714680071]

1714680071

[jaysabi]

Im thinking about writing a long and over-developed post about how retarded America and its fcked up politics, de-railed moneysystem, healthcare, medicine, how-to-war... and so on. But I realize I'm at a Bitcoin-Forum and I assume that if you found your way here your mind should be quite enlightened already.....


Let me tell you; If everyone push a % of the salary at the government and the government DONT WASTE IT AT SHIT there wont be a problem to have a working healthcare, education, w/e you want........

And see, that is the proof of why here in the USA, a scheme like Obamacare will never work.

See bolded above.

We know what happens in Washington DC (District of Criminals).

I don't think the part you highlighted is an American problem so much as an everyone problem. Every group, individual, company, or other entity abuses the power they have to benefit one group over another. That, especially, is what governments do, and further, what people demand they do. Tyranny by the majority.

[jaysabi]

I do not believe writing 0bama or Obama or obama or OBama makes any kind of difference.

This is clearly not true. If it didn't matter, you wouldn't take the extra effort to intentionally misspell the name every time.

Obviously the thread is about if 0bamacare is better than the invention of slice bread or an abomination. Some people think it is great, others keep looking into the abyss of the number zero and expect an explanation to why Wilikon writes 0bamacare with a zero... No one cares, but everyone, including the ones who hate my posts, gets it...

I care. I was wondering why you did it, as I've never seen it done before but it was obviously intentional. While I had my theory about it, I didn't necessarily assume to know your motivation for doing it, which is why I asked. In any event, I have my answer now. I wasn't asking to ridicule you or debate the merits of it, just to understand.

[Wilikon]

I do not believe writing 0bama or Obama or obama or OBama makes any kind of difference.

This is clearly not true. If it didn't matter, you wouldn't take the extra effort to intentionally misspell the name every time.

Obviously the thread is about if 0bamacare is better than the invention of slice bread or an abomination. Some people think it is great, others keep looking into the abyss of the number zero and expect an explanation to why Wilikon writes 0bamacare with a zero... No one cares, but everyone, including the ones who hate my posts, gets it...

I care. I was wondering why you did it, as I've never seen it done before but it was obviously intentional. While I had my theory about it, I didn't necessarily assume to know your motivation for doing it, which is why I asked. In any event, I have my answer now. I wasn't asking to ridicule you or debate the merits of it, just to understand.

Hm. I really did not believe you were trying to ridicule Wilikon as he is but a puppet purely created to have a 'good' time on the bitcointalk forum. My explanation was clear I thought. Yes I am not a fan of obama and to let anyone knows it I write 0bama. There is not much to it really.


As this is not my thread I would hate to be impolite and derail it more with a back and forth here. But you are welcome to move to any of my threads as I am not afraid to derail them myself No need for private messages as I do not care for them.

Now... Back to that evil 0bamacare shall we  

[Spendulus]

Im thinking about writing a long and over-developed post about how retarded America and its fcked up politics, de-railed moneysystem, healthcare, medicine, how-to-war... and so on. But I realize I'm at a Bitcoin-Forum and I assume that if you found your way here your mind should be quite enlightened already.....


Let me tell you; If everyone push a % of the salary at the government and the government DONT WASTE IT AT SHIT there wont be a problem to have a working healthcare, education, w/e you want........

And see, that is the proof of why here in the USA, a scheme like Obamacare will never work.

See bolded above.

We know what happens in Washington DC (District of Criminals).

I don't think the part you highlighted is an American problem so much as an everyone problem. Every group, individual, company, or other entity abuses the power they have to benefit one group over another. That, especially, is what governments do, and further, what people demand they do. Tyranny by the majority.

True to a degree.   Many nations in which socialized medicine work are more comparable to one of the States of the US, than the nation.  It's much easier for the people to keep government straight even in a large state like Texas, than to do so in DC.  DC is totally out of control, so whatever your project, even if it be a health care plan, no sane person would give them control of it.

[oprahwindfury]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

[Spendulus]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

This deserves some sort of award.  Not sure what, though.

"Best Leftist Fantasy of Post-Gruber-Medical-Apocalpse?"

[cryptocoiner]

nothing worng...

[Wilikon]

nothing worng...

Let me quote this typo before it gets changed...

Gruber dismissed the controversy as arising from a “typo” in the law and his own statement as a “speako.”

http://freebeacon.com/issues/the-worst-of-jonathan-gruber/

[Wilikon]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

Basically EVERYONE who's against 0bamacare is making $200 000 or more every year? I did not know I was making so much money with my bitcoins 

If you are typing this from any country but the US or being a paid assistant of the gruber propaganda team then I understand your position.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law

[Kluge]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

Fwiw, surtax is .9%, not .009% (3.8% on investment income). The CBO estimates ~2% of the pool of uninsured Americans will be penalized by the individual mandate requirements, roughly half of uninsured Americans. Oddly enough, this indicates almost a decrease in non-Medicaid-insured Americans from 2007 census data, where uninsured Americans are mostly (~60%) made up of people who are making under $50k/yr and very likely exempt from the ACA's individual mandate. This'd suggest to me that the CBO is estimating the ACA will have little impact on healthcare coverage in the US, roughly in line with 2007 levels. The CBO estimates $9B in receivables (still no word on viable plans to collect since few subject to the individual mandate will have a federal tax refund) from the individual mandate, while the Joint Commission on Taxation estimates ~$45B in additional revenues from ACA taxes. The CBO suggests it's unfunded, with the law creating an additional ~$100B/yr in unfunded federal liabilities from baseline (presumably from Medicaid expansion).

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. Since a free market approach to healthcare is outside the realm of political possibility in the US (and mixed [crony capitalist] systems are terrible everywhere, all the time), I'd be willing to support measures to enact single-payer systems with full, hassle-free national coverage, which the CBO projected in the 90's as being nearly cost-neutral or even cost-negative (compared to current system) due to the greatly reduced administrative costs. Politicians always seem to half-ass things in the US; "compromise."

[jaysabi]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

I understand how it works, I don't make more than $200,000 a years, and I'm still opposed to it. What the program "aims to do" and what it actually does are not the same. Government has a long-running problem with unintended consequences. Unfortunately, the two parties act out of political necessity now, not with any design on what is best for the country. Democrats needed a major policy accomplishment, so this was rushed and rammed through. The vast majority of the Congress didn't read the bill, let alone understand it or be able to foresee the unintended consequences the bill would create. Republicans aren't opposing out of a sense of what is good for the country either. They're opposition is rooted in denying Democrats a major policy win.

My opposition to the bill is on principle. You can't be forced to buy something you don't want to buy, and someone else's problems cannot be made to be your own by government. Everyone is born free and equal, and as a free and equal person to everyone, you cannot be forced an obligation to them unwillingly, which is what socialized medicine is at its base. Your unwillingness to help others who are less fortunate makes you a bad person, but you're free to be a bad person because you're free.

[Spendulus]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

[Wilikon]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

I understand how it works, I don't make more than $200,000 a years, and I'm still opposed to it. What the program "aims to do" and what it actually does are not the same. Government has a long-running problem with unintended consequences. Unfortunately, the two parties act out of political necessity now, not with any design on what is best for the country. Democrats needed a major policy accomplishment, so this was rushed and rammed through. The vast majority of the Congress didn't read the bill, let alone understand it or be able to foresee the unintended consequences the bill would create. Republicans aren't opposing out of a sense of what is good for the country either. They're opposition is rooted in denying Democrats a major policy win.

My opposition to the bill is on principle. You can't be forced to buy something you don't want to buy, and someone else's problems cannot be made to be your own by government. Everyone is born free and equal, and as a free and equal person to everyone, you cannot be forced an obligation to them unwillingly, which is what socialized medicine is at its base. Your unwillingness to help others who are less fortunate makes you a bad person, but you're free to be a bad person because you're free.

Yep!

[Kluge]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

I didn't think of that. I'd guess your employer significantly subsidized healthcare costs where wages (especially for single adults) typically exceed Medicaid income tests and now face higher costs because they have to go from their own insurance pool of productive, able-bodied people to a massive pool of all sorts of people. I thought the practice of companies paying for insurance'd pretty much died off outside, say, $100k+/yr jobs where the tax benefits of taking health care over increased pay gets pretty extreme.

The IRS has no effective way of enforcing the individual mandate. They're claiming they'll withhold federal tax refund checks, but a household failing the Medicaid income tests are unlikely to be receiving a tax refund (though this could be extremely different state-by-state, and some states do asset tests).

[Spendulus]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

I didn't think of that. I'd guess your employer significantly subsidized healthcare costs where wages (especially for single adults) typically exceed Medicaid income tests and now face higher costs because they have to go from their own insurance pool of productive, able-bodied people to a massive pool of all sorts of people. I thought the practice of companies paying for insurance'd pretty much died off outside, say, $100k+/yr jobs where the tax benefits of taking health care over increased pay gets pretty extreme.

The IRS has no effective way of enforcing the individual mandate. They're claiming they'll withhold federal tax refund checks, but a household failing the Medicaid income tests are unlikely to be receiving a tax refund (though this could be extremely different state-by-state, and some states do asset tests).

A.  The Employer Mandate begs to differ with you.

B.  The IRS certainly can and will enforce the individual mandate.  Ever heard of the Earned Income Credit?  They can withhold it in whole or part.

[jaysabi]

The majority of people who oppose Obamacare also known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" don't even have a clue how it works.  The new guideline basically aims to make health care more affordable for everyone. It's not exactly a free handout. The tax increase of .009% only applies if you make more than $200,000 so you can imagine who is voicing their protests for it and brainwashing the masses who don't make anywhere near that to do the same.

I understand how it works, I don't make more than $200,000 a years, and I'm still opposed to it. What the program "aims to do" and what it actually does are not the same. Government has a long-running problem with unintended consequences. Unfortunately, the two parties act out of political necessity now, not with any design on what is best for the country. Democrats needed a major policy accomplishment, so this was rushed and rammed through. The vast majority of the Congress didn't read the bill, let alone understand it or be able to foresee the unintended consequences the bill would create. Republicans aren't opposing out of a sense of what is good for the country either. They're opposition is rooted in denying Democrats a major policy win.

My opposition to the bill is on principle. You can't be forced to buy something you don't want to buy, and someone else's problems cannot be made to be your own by government. Everyone is born free and equal, and as a free and equal person to everyone, you cannot be forced an obligation to them unwillingly, which is what socialized medicine is at its base. Your unwillingness to help others who are less fortunate makes you a bad person, but you're free to be a bad person because you're free.

Yep!

Stop the presses! We just agreed on something Wilikon.

[bf4btc]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

I didn't think of that. I'd guess your employer significantly subsidized healthcare costs where wages (especially for single adults) typically exceed Medicaid income tests and now face higher costs because they have to go from their own insurance pool of productive, able-bodied people to a massive pool of all sorts of people. I thought the practice of companies paying for insurance'd pretty much died off outside, say, $100k+/yr jobs where the tax benefits of taking health care over increased pay gets pretty extreme.

The IRS has no effective way of enforcing the individual mandate. They're claiming they'll withhold federal tax refund checks, but a household failing the Medicaid income tests are unlikely to be receiving a tax refund (though this could be extremely different state-by-state, and some states do asset tests).

The IRS/government has actually explicitly said they will not enforce the individual mandate. The whole concept of Obama care is a joke, it is just a ploy to get more people on a new entitlement program so more people will vote democrat

[Spendulus]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

I didn't think of that. I'd guess your employer significantly subsidized healthcare costs where wages (especially for single adults) typically exceed Medicaid income tests and now face higher costs because they have to go from their own insurance pool of productive, able-bodied people to a massive pool of all sorts of people. I thought the practice of companies paying for insurance'd pretty much died off outside, say, $100k+/yr jobs where the tax benefits of taking health care over increased pay gets pretty extreme.

The IRS has no effective way of enforcing the individual mandate. They're claiming they'll withhold federal tax refund checks, but a household failing the Medicaid income tests are unlikely to be receiving a tax refund (though this could be extremely different state-by-state, and some states do asset tests).

The IRS/government has actually explicitly said they will not enforce the individual mandate. The whole concept of Obama care is a joke, it is just a ploy to get more people on a new entitlement program so more people will vote democrat

I've read about this and find the arguments lacking or outright false.  For example, the argument that for non payment of the penalty "the IRS cannot criminally prosecute  you."

But almost all IRS prosecutions are civil, under administrative and  regulatory law.  They are not criminal prosecutions - those are reserved for such as fraud.

So the IRS simply adds the amount not paid for the penalty to the tax liability, and assesses penalties and interest to that.  The sum doubles or triples each year from those.

And your argument about "not able to collect the penalty because they don't get a tax refund" is false, also.  Look at the nature of the "Earned income credit."  Lots of people get paid money when their return is processed and it's not a "tax refund."

The IRS certainly does have effective ways of enforcing the individual mandate, and it certainly will do it.

[jaysabi]

......

I don't mean to suggest Obamacare is bad or good - I just don't understand why it's such a popular topic when its effects are almost nonexistent outside the related expansion of Medicaid in most states, which could've been done by simply expanding Medicaid - and I doubt "Obamacaid" would've caught on. ....

I doubt that's anywhere close to accurate.

For example, small businesses are struggling with the implications of the new taxes.

My insurance costs almost tripled.

The IRS added 18,000 more goons for enforcement.

The effects are certainly not almost non existent.

I didn't think of that. I'd guess your employer significantly subsidized healthcare costs where wages (especially for single adults) typically exceed Medicaid income tests and now face higher costs because they have to go from their own insurance pool of productive, able-bodied people to a massive pool of all sorts of people. I thought the practice of companies paying for insurance'd pretty much died off outside, say, $100k+/yr jobs where the tax benefits of taking health care over increased pay gets pretty extreme.

The IRS has no effective way of enforcing the individual mandate. They're claiming they'll withhold federal tax refund checks, but a household failing the Medicaid income tests are unlikely to be receiving a tax refund (though this could be extremely different state-by-state, and some states do asset tests).

The IRS/government has actually explicitly said they will not enforce the individual mandate. The whole concept of Obama care is a joke, it is just a ploy to get more people on a new entitlement program so more people will vote democrat

Do you have a source for this claim? Because I've not heard it, I find it hard to believe, and it undercuts the entire system if there's no penalty for not joining.

Spendulus is right about enforcing the mandate. It's not a criminal action, it's administrative. There are fees and interest, which if you don't pay may eventually wind up with a criminal complaint, but the IRS is an administrative agency.