US government shuts down as Congress misses deadline

[lannarebirth]

The government doesn't exist to make profit. You're thinking of McDonalds or something. In any case the ACA is NOT a nationalized universal health care program anyway! Too bad about that, but the ACA preserves the private medical health care and insurance profit based system.

Anyway:

The problems on the Web sites were not caused by staffing shortages due to the government shutdown, because most of the government employees involved with the law’s implementation were not furloughed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/obamacare-site-goes-live-with-some-glitches/2013/10/01/380a4300-2a9d-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html?hpid=z3

What do you expect from a new system that is overloaded? The opponents of Obama are wishing expanded health care access to fail. That's downright nasty.

Of course there are glitches. There are always glitches. Glitches can be fixed. Can the glitch that is the tea party "movement" be fixed?

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/613766-what-are-the-odds-of-obama-making-a-second-term-without-being-impeached/?p=6401669

[NeverSure]

Next the doctors become defensive, and prescribe multiple tests and anything they can think of to avoid later being sued. They don't dare miss anything. What's a couple of extra MRI's so you can prove you checked everything from every angle, so you don't get a million or ten million dollar award against you?

Oh please. Doctors prescribe a battery of tests because they know the insurers will pay for them, and ultimately that cost is passed on to the consumer.

That's why healthcare in the US is so expensive.

If you want the best, it's going to cost you. The US has a whole industry of providing health care to wealthy Canadians and others who could get it "free" in their home country. Also, there is no effective rationing in the US via long wait times which sometimes result in no care.

In 2010 there was a big scandal because a Canadian Premier flew to the US to get his heart surgery done. He could have gotten it free in Canada, but he flew to the US and paid for it out of his own pocket.

The technology of how the surgery was done wasn't available in Canada, to anyone. He was willing to pay for the advanced technology.

‘My heart, my choice,’ Williams says, defending decision for U.S. heart surgery

By Tara Brautigam (CP)

February 23, 2010

"An unapologetic Danny Williams says he was aware his trip to the United States for heart surgery earlier this month would spark outcry, but he concluded his personal health trumped any public fallout over the controversial decision.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, Williams said he went to Miami to have a "minimally invasive" surgery for an ailment first detected nearly a year ago, based on the advice of his doctors.

"This was my heart, my choice and my health," Williams said late Monday from his condominium in Sarasota, Fla.

"I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics."

Link

Edited October 2, 2013 by NeverSure

[Credo]

As other posters have mentioned, the republicans have tried to propose adjustments to help improve Obammacare , but seems are no interested in making any changes to the program

As I understand it, if dems were willing to make some adjustments to the bill , then Republicans have agreed to sign off on it

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

As you understand it?

There are two "adjustments" they are trying to make.

(1) Delay it for a year and (2) eliminate one of its sources of funding, a 2.3% levy on medical devices.

The whole point of Obamacare is that it gets cheaper as it develops.

All the GOP fanatics are trying to do is keep it at the top of the curve.

The tax is fair given that it will drive lots of new customers to the device manufacturers.

These are not Republican "adjustments", this is the GOP trying to sabotage Obamacare.

Not sure where you get your information, but you are incorrect. It gets more expensive over time. The rates for non-compliance and participation grow over the next 6 years, not decrease.

Just for giggles, I got a price quotation from my state's ACA exchange yesterday. The ACA rates for less coverage than I have today is triple the cost of my current health care policy. And this was with three times the deducible and a cap of 50% of what my current policy provides on expenditures. So no, it is not less expensive by a long shot.

All you have to do is examine the rates / deductibles for services provided under ACA to realize that it is a scam and a joke, designed to line the pockets of the health care and insurance industries.

OK just for giggles, tell me how long you have had your insurance? I am guessing quite a few years, so now the rate would be higher, but let's not let the obvious get in the way.

Now, tell me, for people like myself, who could never get insurance, what we should do?

[qdinthailand]

This is a trial run; if it works we make it permanent!

See - its the conservatives that hate the U.S. - not the lefties they conservatives whine about all the time.

Its conservatives think there's no use for the government - the constitution be damned, even though they claim to be in the know regarding the original founders beliefs, attitudes and ideas when they drafted the darn thing.

Conservatives hate their country so much they'd rather it blow up and disappear. They think they got it bad now; wait till their lives are run by the idiots that run their states.

Except, for some reason, the democrat leaning states as a rule, have higher incomes, higher education achievement, better health. Of course, its democrats taking money from republicans (not - its the red states as a rule get more back from the Feds then they kick into the pot).

[Publicus]

I really wish people would study this issue. The government shutdown is essentially over Obamacare.

Many people are fooled into thinking that Obamacare is national healthcare, Canadian or European style. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I just posted and explanation of the Republicans' objections, and a google link to back it up.

A lot of people are in for a shock when they find out that this Obamacare is nothing more than a federal mandate that each person buy his own health care. If he doesn't for the whole family, he pays a penalty to the IRS.

He has to prove on each year's tax return that he has health care that meets the government standard, or get hit with a penalty.

The penalty is much less than the insurance and I believe that many people will opt to pay the penalty, remaining uninsured.

Here's that link again. Obamacare doesn't give people health insurance.

The Republicans are right on this one. It needs to be binned and re-addressed as something which will work.

https://www.google.com/#q=obamacare+buy+or+pay+penalty

I don't know details, but I know Republicans want to dis Obama every chance they get. More importantly; Have the Reps proposed any plan which is better? Perhaps they're just in favor of 'every man for himself, and tough tamales for the elderly and sick.' Most Republicans are rich anyway (certainly their politicians are), so buying high-priced insurance or paying out-of-pocket for health care is not tough for them.

The Republican Study Committee of the House, a tea party group, just recently presented an alternative health and medical care plan to the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

Republicans for several years now have been screaming "repeal and replace" Obamacare. They've been strong on repeal - the House has voted an absurd 42 times to repeal Obamacare - but very short on the "replace" aspect of it.

Hence last week the tea party Republicans in the House, i.e., most Republicans in the House, have presented a "replace" proposal, called the American Health Care Reform Act. Republicans needed this plan during the 2012 presidential election cycle so they missed the boat on this one. Obamacare easily won the 2012 presidential election.

As the analysis below makes clear, the Republican tea party health care alternative proposal throws a lot of people under the bus that are taken care of by Obamacare. It is also much too expensive to get the support of Republicans in Washington or throughout the country.

Here's the cite and the quotes:

http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/the-republican-study-committee-has-a-replace-plan/

There are two problems with the House plan though. The first is that it will obviously cost a lot of money. How much is not clear, but it won’t be insignificant. How will that be paid for? The second is that a tax deduction is much more valuable to someone who makes a lot of money than someone who makes little. But people with large incomes aren’t the ones who need help affording coverage. It’s those at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum who need the most assistance. Because of their low marginal tax rates, a tax deduction is of very little help.

Sick Americans would receive very little help under the plan too. One of the ways the ACA helps the sick is by eliminating the ability of insurers to refuse to cover them (guaranteed issue) or to charge them more for being ill (community rating). The House plan weakens the guaranteed issue protection by extending it only to those who have continuous coverage. If you dropped (or were forced out) of prior coverage, you may not be able to get back in the market

The long and the short of the House tea party Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act is that:

We understand that putting together a health plan is challenging. Nothing good comes without limitations and costs. That’s true of the House plan as well as the ACA. But if you’re committed to coming up with a way to expanding coverage while preserving the private insurance market, at least the ACA follows an established model. It happens to be how Massachusetts did it. It’s how Switzerland did it. And it’s how the conservative Heritage Foundation suggested doing it in 1989.

The House is claiming it has a new way. But to us it only looks like a way back to the same problems that plague the system today

And I don't know of anyone who thinks or believes Obamacare is national health insurance or medical care, UK style.

Americans know health and medical insurance under Obamacare is a market based approach to health and medical care provided by private insurance companies under closer government scrutiny and regulation, which is a good and needed thing.

A hundred million Americans went online beginning the past Tuesday, October 1st to find out this is what Obamacare is and which low premium private insurer plan is best for them.

The fanaticism of House tea party Republicans on this issue is reflected in the fact of their having voted 42 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act and now by shutting down the government.

[qdinthailand]

Incredible that they're still thinking in shortterm elections effects. The us are on the verge of bankrupcy. They will cause the biggest crises ever. USD will be worth crap soon.

I've been hearing that the dollar will crash in value, about 1,000 times for a coon's age, but the dollar is still doing ok.

Probably good I wasn't an economic advisor to prez Bush or Obama, because I would have advised they not bail out Wall St. the banks, The automakers, AIS, Goldman Sachs or Real Estate Conglomerates. It seems Uncle Sam came out of the woodshed in pretty good shape, considering Americans were staring at a depression about to happen, in 2008.

Oh, the bailout worked ok for the Banks, Automakers, Wall St., AIG, etc. They just shifted a whole bunch of debt onto the taxpayers - the little guys. Which is why the conservatives now want to scale back social security, medicare and other health care, education, research, EPA, Food and Drug Admin, - you know, the regulators. Can't afford that stuff now, what with all the debt. Make the rich pay more? not in our life time - even though they were the ones benefitted the most by bailing out Wall St.

[qdinthailand]

House Speaker John A. Boehner fell in a trap. It's a temporary shutdown.

US embassy will not be affected.

Which economy is in worse shape, USA or GB?

"237 years" and some people can't forget that. Wow

That would be 'fell into a trap' (unless he's been drinking heavily while golfing - a distinct possibility) and it's a 'partial' shutdown. Too bad it (instantaneous govmint shrinkage) won't be 'permanent'. Don't worry, from what I understand all that are furloughed will eventually get paid retroactively.

Amen. Let's close theentire place down. Our yearly budget is now 3.7 trillion dollars per year and I remember the Stalinists screaming high heavens when Bush's budgets were 800 billion. I am not a big fan of the way that the progressives republicans are conducting the government shutdown at all.

If I were the Speaker I would propose to make Obama the richest and most powerful person in the history of America with a a couple of stipulations. Off the top of my head the goverment fleeced the American peasants out of 2.3 trillion dollars this current fiscal year. I would propose that we give all 2.3 trillion dollars to Obama under the condition that the first two things that he must pay for are interest of the 16 trillion dollar debt and make a 5% downpayment of it. He could spend the rest of the money in any way that he deems fit but not one cent more.

"progressive republicans"?

There are none - they became extinct somewhere around 2006.

[Scott]

A troll post has been removed.

Please stay on topic.

Edit: Also a post has been removed with a reply inside the quote box.

[qdinthailand]

I believe on the news it was mentioning that the program had started.

Somewhat true, but not entirely.

Some things kicked in a couple years ago, shortly after it was adopted. Like staying on parents insurance until age 26.

They just started the enrollment into the core of ACA programs - which actually starts Jan 1, 2014.

[NeverSure]

I really wish people would study this issue. The government shutdown is essentially over Obamacare.

Many people are fooled into thinking that Obamacare is national healthcare, Canadian or European style. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I just posted and explanation of the Republicans' objections, and a google link to back it up.

A lot of people are in for a shock when they find out that this Obamacare is nothing more than a federal mandate that each person buy his own health care. If he doesn't for the whole family, he pays a penalty to the IRS.

He has to prove on each year's tax return that he has health care that meets the government standard, or get hit with a penalty.

The penalty is much less than the insurance and I believe that many people will opt to pay the penalty, remaining uninsured.

Here's that link again. Obamacare doesn't give people health insurance.

The Republicans are right on this one. It needs to be binned and re-addressed as something which will work.

https://www.google.com/#q=obamacare+buy+or+pay+penalty

I don't know details, but I know Republicans want to dis Obama every chance they get. More importantly; Have the Reps proposed any plan which is better? Perhaps they're just in favor of 'every man for himself, and tough tamales for the elderly and sick.' Most Republicans are rich anyway (certainly their politicians are), so buying high-priced insurance or paying out-of-pocket for health care is not tough for them.

The Republican Study Committee of the House, a tea party group, just recently presented an alternative health and medical care plan to the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

Republicans for several years now have been screaming "repeal and replace" Obamacare. They've been strong on repeal - the House has voted an absurd 42 times to repeal Obamacare - but very short on the "replace" aspect of it.

Hence last week the tea party Republicans in the House, i.e., most Republicans in the House, have presented a "replace" proposal, called the American Health Care Reform Act. Republicans needed this plan during the 2012 presidential election cycle so they missed the boat on this one. Obamacare easily won the 2012 presidential election.

As the analysis below makes clear, the Republican tea party health care alternative proposal throws a lot of people under the bus that are taken care of by Obamacare. It is also much too expensive to get the support of Republicans in Washington or throughout the country.

Here's the cite and the quotes:

http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/the-republican-study-committee-has-a-replace-plan/

The long and the short of the House tea party Republican alternative to the Affordable Care Act is that:

And I don't know of anyone who thinks or believes Obamacare is national health insurance or medical care, UK style.

Americans know health and medical insurance under Obamacare is a market based approach to health and medical care provided by private insurance companies under closer government scrutiny and regulation, which is a good and needed thing.

A hundred million Americans went online beginning the past Tuesday, October 1st to find out this is what Obamacare is and which low premium private insurer plan is best for them.

The fanaticism of House tea party Republicans on this issue is reflected in the fact of their having voted 42 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act and now by shutting down the government.

I simply fail to see what people will like about this 5 years down the road when reality sets in. They are now required to buy insurance, and insurance companies are raising premiums to account for the administration and other added costs such as insuring pre-existing conditions. Many insurance companies are refusing to offer it in many states.

Obamacare does nothing to control costs or to control premiums. It simply mandates buying insurance.

The bottom line is that it places a mandate, but does NOTHING to reduce or control health care costs. That's bass ackwards.

They should have gone to work on reducing health care costs in the US via several simple new laws, or by repealing some laws first. Get the system working so it isn't so expensive. But no, they didn't address any of that.

Then once costs are under control, it would be time to try to mandate it for everyone.

But they only addressed the mandate side, and ignored the cost side, and it will therefore fail.

And please stop blaming the "Tea Party." It isn't a political party. It is a tiny fraction of what's happening. The leadership of the House is comprised of people who aren't members of the Tea Party. I don't personally know anyone who is a member. It just gives you another phrase to use which in context is disparaging of some group you don't like.

[Chicog]

For those that want more information on the subject, here's a link:

http://obamacarefacts.com/howdoes-obamacare-work.php

[Credo]

There was another party that was in office before this guy. They had 8 years to do something about health care cost as well.

In typical fashion, they did nothing, but now they have chosen to shut down the gov't.

[Chicog]

Interesting that if you look at the top 20 recipients of cash from the Health Care industry, 15 of them are from - guess which party before you look.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?cycle=2014&ind=H

Edited October 2, 2013 by Chicog

[notmyself]

America was not shut down properly. Would you like to start America in safe mode, with free healthcare & without the guns? (Recommended)

[F430murci]

Meeting called at White House at 5:30. Tea leaves are saying that both sides have deal and initiated this as means to end this fiasco in a way to save some face. I am betting that the Republicans and dems contacted White House and said: "here is what we are going to do" . . . We already got a deal, call meeting with heads of parties, we meet, act like we are hammering it out and announce our plan (which will likely be another face saving band aide over the abscess comprised of concessions on both sides that keeps government running).

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/02/20777759-obama-summons-hill-leaders-to-white-house-on-shutdowns-second-day?lite

[notmyself]

Meeting called at White House at 5:30. Tea leaves are saying that both sides have deal and initiated this as means to end this fiasco in a way to save some face. I am betting that the Republicans and dems contacted White House and said: "here is what we are going to do" . . . We already got a deal, call meeting with heads of parties, we meet, act like we are hammering it out and announce our plan (which will likely be another face saving band aide over the abscess comprised of concessions on both sides that keeps government running).

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/02/20777759-obama-summons-hill-leaders-to-white-house-on-shutdowns-second-day?lite

I hope the Dems drive the nails in so as to destroy the Republican party in its present form.

[Chicog]

Even if they don't make this part of the debt ceiling argument, there will still be a debt ceiling argument.

[F430murci]

Defensive medicine, tort reform reducing health care costs and etc. too funny. Studies have shown that restrictive tort reform did nothing to reduce costs or premiums to doctors. Check

No Reduction in Costs

In Texas, tort reform passed in 2003 limited payouts in medical malpractice lawsuits. Researchers from the University of Texas examined Medicare spending in Texas counties between 2002 and 2009 to look at the results of the reform. They saw no reduction in doctor’s fees for seniors and disabled patients. In addition, results showed that Medicare payments to doctors rose 1-2 percent faster in Texas than in the rest of the country.

Patients See No Benefits

In October 2011, non-profit advocacy group Public Citizen released a report entitled “A Failed Experiment,” noting that health care in Texas has worsened in key respects since liability caps were put into effect in 2003. Malpractice lawsuits dropped dramatically since the caps were imposed, but patients failed to reap any benefits. Medicare spending and private insurance premiums have both risen faster than the national average, while the percentage of Texans who lack health insurance has gone up. The per capita number of primary care physicians has remained flat, while the prevalence of those in non-metropolitan areas has declined.

Since reform was enacted in 2003, malpractice premium rates are uneven, and more than twice as high for general surgeons in Hidalgo County, for example, as they are in Potter County. These results echoed those of a 2007 study published in Health Affairs, where researchers noted, “tort reforms’ overall impact appears to be extremely limited.”

Major Problems

Jeez, I really don't want to delve into this as I could talk for days with examples and findings from many states. I am also involved with peer review and quality assurance committees at several large hospitals and numerous nursing home operators.

Defensive Medicine

Wish this was true. If you have good insurance, you will get a butt load of test. If you have no insurance or crap insurance, God be with you.

Case in Point

I actually represented, and do so occasionally, a family and 12 year old girl in Florida on tri care. I can go after Government hospitals because I do not represent them.

She complained of head aches for several days. One Saturday, her young brother found her passed out on the kitchen floor with emesis coming from her mouth. The parent arrived home. Her eye were rolled back in her head and she was unaware of her name or who her parents were.

She was taken by ambulance to a hospital where she become somewhat more lucid, but still very much out of it. The triage nurse checked her. The doctor checked her. The triage nurse came back and said the doctor ordered a CT scan.

3 hours passed with no CT scan. Father asked staff twice when they were going to do CT Scan. A different nurse walks into the room with discharge papers and a prescription for Phenergan saying she had a stomach virus. The family objected, asked about the CT scan, but she said the doctor advised no need for a CT scan it was just a stomach virus.

They go home and administer the Phenergan which masks the true symptoms. The next morning they cannot awake as she is sleeping on the couch. Her eyes were rolled back into her head and she was nonresponsive. At recommendation of EMT, the family agrees to go to a different hospital and she is rushed into emergency surgery immediately upon arrival.

She was bleeding out in the brain and had to have 20 % of her frontal lobe removed. The neurosurgeon stated unequivocally, that every hour that passed meant a larger part of the brain had to be removed and based on her symptom 24 hours before, she could have had a complete recovery with proper treatment. The girls spent her 13th and 14th birthdays in a rehab facility in Atlanta learning to feed her self and form words.

Legislative Wisdom of Florida and why Tort Reform does not work

Because the decision not to perform a CT scan was made in the ER, Florida capped damages at $ 50,000 for this girl with 20% of her brain gone due to doctors failure to follow through with a CT scan. Some states push for and have obtain no liability statutes for ER decisions unless gross negligence.

Florida's great laws simply passed the burden of caring for this child on the party less able to afford it, despite a clear case of medical malpractice.

[F430murci]

Medical device industry

Haha, this is a great one and they need to be taxed heavily.

Doctors rates have been reduced to pathetic levels. Orthopod or neurosurgeon is paid (Insurance rates) about $ 1,200 to $ 1,500 dollars for a two-level spinal fussion is a complicated and invasive surgery. Doctors makes more off upcharges on pedicle screws inserted depending on his agreements with the device companies.

This is the part I love, that same doctor that worked his tail off for 3 + hours in surgery can make about $ 2,500 off prescribing a useless medical device called a bone stimulator (Looks a bit like a TENs unit) that has zero good science behind. They are bunk and doctors know it, but insurance companies will pay around $ 5,000 for them to be worn 45 days. The medical device company will lease the bone stimulator to the doctors for $ 2,500, the doctor can charge insurance $ 5,000 and pocket the remaining $ 2,500.

Medical device companies came up with this lease back idea because doctors would not prescribe bone stimulators because they were bunk. When doctors can now make $ 2,500 per unit for say, 15 patients have long bone or spinal surgery a month, that means some doctors will happily prescribe them, especially when they are ticked off about now making only $ 1,200 t0 $ 1,500 for the actual surgery.

This is but one of many examples of which I am aware . . .

[F430murci]

Largest problem with hospitals I represent is indigent care. The ERs have to accept these patients.

Patients with no insurance, prevalent in larger cities, cannot be seen by a doctor for a cold, diabetes episode, or just to refill a prescription needed. GP will not see patients unless they have insurance or can pay upfront. This results in uninsured going to ERs for common colds, to check blood pressure or for a refill on medications. The amount of these patients are staggering at some hospitals and use up ER resources. They also incur $ 1,000 plus hospital bills for a cold that ERs and doctors cannot recoup. If they have conditions requiring surgery, then there are 6 figure bills that no-one involved in the care can recoup.

The funny part here, is that I have friends that are EMTs. In large cities, they spend 80 percent of their time picking up indigents wanting to go to the hospital for colds, blood pressure, medications and etc. They have to take them and indigents know this. My buddy told me they once picked a women up and when they arrived to the hospital, she got up and walked off in a different direction. She apparently was using the ambulance as a cab.

Right now, those that can pay or have insurance are subsidizing these uninsured that end up in ERs and hospitals daily. Costs structure definitely factors in indigent care.

The Affordable Health Care Act has both good and bad, as does anything. Once the extreme waste and huge write offs due to uninsured and indigent care are reigned in, costs should somewhat stabilize in the not too distant future.

In the grand scheme of things, however, what does it really mean or matter? Can I do without another car or can some of you do without another gun so poor people and children can receive proper health care? One of my very oldest and dearest friends is tea party whacko and I think he told me has about 150 guns, maybe more. He also has like 8 or 9 Harleys, big house and etc. He is so pissed that he might have to pay more in premiums and I am thinking dude, seems like you could sacrifice a gun a year, if that, to make sure people in need have access to health care.

Truthfully, I think in the 3 to 5 year range, this will be much cheaper than where we are headed now as insurance companies will have to subsidize more and more indigent and uninsured care through higher charges to cover hospital and doctors overhead.

[notmyself]

Even if they don't make this part of the debt ceiling argument, there will still be a debt ceiling argument.

[Publicus]

Jon Stewart keeps hammering the hammerheads in Washington who wrongly say that, beyond the fact of news reports, no one in the country has noticed the government is shut down - or the part of the government has shut down that affects National Institutes of Health cancer treatment of children programs, head start programs, veterans' administration programs, processing of home loan federal guarantees, school lunch program assistance and many more real, everyday programs funded by Washington and which assist Americans, the dwindling middle class especially.

Stewart Takes Down Fox News and 'Republican Morons' for Downplaying Shutdown - video link

The government shutdown has affected a number of government programs and agencies, but Jon Stewart noticed Tuesday night that some conservatives and Fox News pundits still don’t think it’s a big deal. He called them out for downplaying how serious the shutdown is, even issuing a strong “<deleted>*k you!” to one Fox contributor.

VIDEO here: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stewart-takes-down-fox-news-and-republican-morons-for-downplaying-shutdown/

[Publicus]

Even if they don't make this part of the debt ceiling argument, there will still be a debt ceiling argument.

The video is precious.

One needs to follow the details presented, which is not difficult to do. It's just a few moments patience required for a big return of knowledge and information about the incestuous relations between retired (or defeated) members of congress - and their staffs - and the huge lobbying industry in Washington that represents neither you nor I (unless, that is, you're a Republican).

This video and its presentation is superb.

[Publicus]

Meeting called at White House at 5:30. Tea leaves are saying that both sides have deal and initiated this as means to end this fiasco in a way to save some face. I am betting that the Republicans and dems contacted White House and said: "here is what we are going to do" . . . We already got a deal, call meeting with heads of parties, we meet, act like we are hammering it out and announce our plan (which will likely be another face saving band aide over the abscess comprised of concessions on both sides that keeps government running).

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/02/20777759-obama-summons-hill-leaders-to-white-house-on-shutdowns-second-day?lite

I hope the Dems drive the nails in so as to destroy the Republican party in its present form.

The Republican party in its present form is the destroyed previous Republican party of Bush the father and those before him.

Worse for the R party, the R party in its present form is the Kamakaze party. They're self-destructing very well on their own. They don't really need any assistance from anyone, although your sentiments are well taken, so I agree we should contribute in any way we can, at any time we can.

[Publicus]

So much for another bogus claim against Obamacare, i.e., that young people aren't or won't join the privately based medical and health care program for all Americans.

Premiums on Obamacare marketplaces beat expectations, report shows

Play Video

The administration sees the lower-than-expected premiums as a sign that the plan to drive down health costs for consumers by increasing competition is working. They also point to the insurers entering the individual health insurance market for the first time as a sign of strong competition, as well as the variety of plans that will be available on the market.

When open enrollment begins on the online, state-based marketplaces established under Obamacare, premiums nationwide are expected to be around 16 percent lower than originally predicted, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department said in a new report released Wednesday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57604498/premiums-on-obamacare-marketplaces-beat-expectations-report-shows/

[NeverSure]

So much for another bogus claim against Obamacare, i.e., that young people aren't or won't join the privately based medical and health care program for all Americans.

Premiums on Obamacare marketplaces beat expectations, report shows

Play Video

The administration sees the lower-than-expected premiums as a sign that the plan to drive down health costs for consumers by increasing competition is working. They also point to the insurers entering the individual health insurance market for the first time as a sign of strong competition, as well as the variety of plans that will be available on the market.

When open enrollment begins on the online, state-based marketplaces established under Obamacare, premiums nationwide are expected to be around 16 percent lower than originally predicted, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department said in a new report released Wednesday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57604498/premiums-on-obamacare-marketplaces-beat-expectations-report-shows/

Yes, the liberal main stream media and its predictions. Remember, nothing has been done to lower the US cost of health care in any way.

Give it a couple of years and see if the youngsters actually buy insurance or pay the much lower penalties and remain uninsured. This is still a mandate to buy insurance, or pay a small penalty.

Give it a couple of years and see how much it costs the government in administrative grants to states, and its own administrative costs to NOT give people health insurance.

This battle is about spending money ie the debt ceiling increase, and a government intrusion to force this mandate.

In other threads there is this constant drum beat about how much debt the US has. Then when a group balks at more spending and debt, they are demonized. Folks can't have it both ways. That's hypocritical.

The Republicans are balking at spending more money on something that doesn't lower the cost of health care in the US or provide people with health care, and at increasing the debt. That's what the shutdown is about.

I think the Republicans have it right, but the media won't explain the truth to the masses.

People I talk to on the street actually believe the government is going to give them health care and of course they are all for it. Explain the facts to them and take another poll. Oh wait, the facts will come out in the next couple of years.

Get back to me in a couple of years when this mess hits the masses in the wallet and the national debt graph becomes steeper.

[Publicus]

*Deleted post edited out*

Ed, balls and pounds.

The Confederates in the Congress are at it again.

The civil war continues.

"The civil war continues."

Exactly what does that mean? What does this have to do with the Civil War?

Republican Calls Tea Party ‘Insurrectionist Neo-Confederates Dedicated to Apocalyptic Outcomes’ (VIDEO)

"Now what we have is an insurrectionist neo-confederate party that seems to be dedicated to all kinds of apocalyptic outcomes.

"This is something new. What we’re seeing here is a crisis of democracy where one party believe its principles are so correct, so strong and the other party’s principles are so evil, that we’re essentially talking about God compromising with Satan.”

http://samuel-warde.com/2013/10/republican-tea-party-neo-confederates/

That is what I'm referring to.

I'm not predicting another civil war. I am talking about tea party Republicans who are absolutists in a democratic system that is predicated on compromise in order for it to succeed.

I'm talking about a democratic system that is based on rationality and the reasonable person theory of society, by which a balanced and rational society, a liberal democracy, is enabled by a collective of individuals who agree to disagree.

The tea party group in the House, and now having its beginnings in the Senate, not only disagree, they disagree in the absolute. They behave and conduct themselves in the absolute. They are right, the country and world are wrong. They know, the rest of us don't. Which is the antithesis of liberal democracy. It is the opposite of the US democratic system, which is predicated on compromise.

You don't know any more than the rest of us do about Obamacare. You and I both know Obamacare is succeeding and will continue to succeed. Its success will only increase as more of it comes on line. This is what Republicans and right wingers fear and fear the most.

The above quotes are by the individuals below. The video of the appearance on MSNBC television this morning is at the link above connected to their quotes from their television appearance.

Bruce Bartlett is a former Senior Political Analyst in the Reagan White House and the former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy in the George H. W. Bush Administration.

Michael Lofgren is a former staff member on the House and Senate budget committees - he held that position for 28 years. He is also the author of The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless And The Middle Class Got Shafted.

[notmyself]

I think the Republicans have it right, but the media won't explain the truth to the masses.

People I talk to on the street actually believe the government is going to give them health care and of course they are all for it. Explain the facts to them and take another poll. Oh wait, the facts will come out in the next couple of years.

Get back to me in a couple of years when this mess hits the masses in the wallet and the national debt graph becomes steeper.

I agree. Look what happened when the US gave women the right to vote... or stopped African Americans having to sit at the back of the bus... In fact, why not bring back slavery because it all went tits up after that didn't it. Didn't it?

[NeverSure]

I think the Republicans have it right, but the media won't explain the truth to the masses.

People I talk to on the street actually believe the government is going to give them health care and of course they are all for it. Explain the facts to them and take another poll. Oh wait, the facts will come out in the next couple of years.

Get back to me in a couple of years when this mess hits the masses in the wallet and the national debt graph becomes steeper.

I agree. Look what happened when the US gave women the right to vote... or stopped African Americans having to sit at the back of the bus... In fact, why not bring back slavery because it all went tits up after that didn't it. Didn't it?

You are being totally irrelevant to the problems with the national debt ceiling or Obamacare.

You also apparently know little about the history of the Republican Party, or it's fights for individual rights. Obamacare takes away individual rights and increases spending and the debt, and here are the Republicans - again.

Here are some things the Republican Party has done, published by a women's group.

These are the informed people. Link

"Abolishing slavery. Free speech. Women's suffrage (the right to vote). In today's stereotypes, none of these sounds like a typical Republican issue, yet they are stances the Republican Party, in opposition to the Democratic Party, adopted early on.

Reducing the government. Streamlining the bureaucracy. Returning power to the states. These issues don't sound like they would be the promises of the party of Lincoln, the party that fought to preserve the national union, but they are, and logically so. With a core belief in the idea of the primacy of individuals, the Republican Party, since its inception, has been at the forefront of the fight for individuals' rights in opposition to a large, bloated government.

The Republican Party has always thrived on challenges and difficult positions. Its present role as leader of the revolution in which the principles of government are being re-evaluated is a role it has traditionally embraced."

[Publicus]

So much for another bogus claim against Obamacare, i.e., that young people aren't or won't join the privately based medical and health care program for all Americans.

Premiums on Obamacare marketplaces beat expectations, report shows

Play Video

The administration sees the lower-than-expected premiums as a sign that the plan to drive down health costs for consumers by increasing competition is working. They also point to the insurers entering the individual health insurance market for the first time as a sign of strong competition, as well as the variety of plans that will be available on the market.

When open enrollment begins on the online, state-based marketplaces established under Obamacare, premiums nationwide are expected to be around 16 percent lower than originally predicted, the U.S. Health and Human Services Department said in a new report released Wednesday.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57604498/premiums-on-obamacare-marketplaces-beat-expectations-report-shows/

Yes, the liberal main stream media and its predictions. Remember, nothing has been done to lower the US cost of health care in any way.

Give it a couple of years and see if the youngsters actually buy insurance or pay the much lower penalties and remain uninsured. This is still a mandate to buy insurance, or pay a small penalty.

Give it a couple of years and see how much it costs the government in administrative grants to states, and its own administrative costs to NOT give people health insurance.

This battle is about spending money ie the debt ceiling increase, and a government intrusion to force this mandate.

In other threads there is this constant drum beat about how much debt the US has. Then when a group balks at more spending and debt, they are demonized. Folks can't have it both ways. That's hypocritical.

The Republicans are balking at spending more money on something that doesn't lower the cost of health care in the US or provide people with health care, and at increasing the debt. That's what the shutdown is about.

I think the Republicans have it right, but the media won't explain the truth to the masses.

People I talk to on the street actually believe the government is going to give them health care and of course they are all for it. Explain the facts to them and take another poll. Oh wait, the facts will come out in the next couple of years.

Get back to me in a couple of years when this mess hits the masses in the wallet and the national debt graph becomes steeper.

Saying now, presently, to see you a couple of years from now so you can prove yourself to be right, is meaningless.

In any subject, saying you will be proved to be correct at any point into the future is vacuous.

Unless, that is, you are Karnac the Magnificent.