United States of Entropy

[anitram]

Or, as INDY put it, there doesn't need to be a default, Obama can just cut all spending and continue to pay the bills!

(Because that would not have an impact on the global markets or the state of the US economy or the ratings, etc)

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Pearl

But if Michelle Bachmann, Ted Cruz and the others were elected, then anything is possible

"[the U.S.'s funding of al Qaeda in Syria] happened and as of today the United States is willingly, knowingly, intentionally sending arms to terrorists, now what this says to me, I’m a believer in Jesus Christ, as I look at the End Times scripture, this says to me that the leaf is on the fig tree and we are to understand the signs of the times, which is your ministry, we are to understand where we are in God’s end times history. Rather than seeing this as a negative, we need to rejoice, Maranatha Come Lord Jesus, His day is at hand. When we see up is down and right is called wrong, when this is happening, we were told this; these days would be as the days of Noah.” ~ Michelle Bachman

Of Course Michele Bachmann Believes the End Times Are Here - Abby Ohlheiser - The Atlantic Wire

so there's that.

[anitram]

She may actually be mentally ill.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

so there's that.

I concede - that's pretty wacko.

[Irvine511]

the ACA probably deserves it's own thread, but i'll put this here:

THE BUSINESS END OF OBAMACARE
BY JAMES SUROWIECKI
OCTOBER 14, 2013

Of the countless reasons that congressional Republicans hate the Affordable Care Act enough to shut down the government, the most politically potent is the claim that it will do untold damage to the economy and cripple small companies. Orrin Hatch has said that Obamacare will be “devastating to small business.” Ted Cruz argues that it is already “the No. 1 job killer.” And the vice-president of the National Federation of Independent Businesses called it simply “terrible.” So it comes as some surprise to learn that Obamacare may well be the best thing Washington has done for American small business in decades.

The G.O.P.’s case hinges on the employer mandate, which requires companies with fifty or more full-time employees to provide health insurance. It also regulates the kind of insurance that companies can offer: insurance has to cover at least sixty per cent of costs, and premiums can’t be more than 9.5 per cent of employees’ income. Companies that don’t offer insurance will pay a penalty. Republicans argue that this will hurt companies’ profits, forcing them to stop hiring and to cut workers’ hours, in order to stay below the fifty-employee threshold.

The story is guaranteed to feed the fears of small-business owners. But the overwhelming majority of American businesses—ninety-six per cent—have fewer than fifty employees. The employer mandate doesn’t touch them. And more than ninety per cent of the companies above that threshold already offer health insurance. Only three per cent are in the zone (between forty and seventy-five employees) where the threshold will be an issue. Even if these firms get more cautious about hiring—and there’s little evidence that they will—the impact on the economy would be small.

Meanwhile, the likely benefits of Obamacare for small businesses are enormous. To begin with, it’ll make it easier for people to start their own companies—which has always been a risky proposition in the U.S., because you couldn’t be sure of finding affordable health insurance. As John Arensmeyer, who heads the advocacy group Small Business Majority, and is himself a former small-business owner, told me, “In the U.S., we pride ourselves on our entrepreneurial spirit, but we’ve had this bizarre disincentive in the system that’s kept people from starting new businesses.” Purely for the sake of health insurance, people stay in jobs they aren’t suited to—a phenomenon that economists call “job lock.” “With the new law, job lock goes away,” Arensmeyer said. “Anyone who wants to start a business can do so independent of the health-care costs.” Studies show that people who are freed from job lock (for instance, when they start qualifying for Medicare) are more likely to undertake something entrepreneurial, and one recent study projects that Obamacare could enable 1.5 million people to become self-employed.

Even more important, Obamacare will help small businesses with health-care costs, which have long been a source of anxiety. The fact that most Americans get their insurance through work is a historical accident: during the Second World War, wages were frozen, so companies began offering health insurance instead. After the war, attempts to create universal heath care were stymied by conservatives and doctors, and Congress gave corporations tax incentives to keep providing insurance. The system has worked well enough for big employers, since large workforces make possible the pooling of risk that any healthy insurance market requires. But small businesses often face so-called “experience rating”: a business with a lot of women or older workers faces high premiums, and even a single employee who runs up medical costs can be a disaster. A business that Arensmeyer represents recently saw premiums skyrocket because one employee has a child with diabetes. Insurance costs small companies as much as eighteen per cent more than it does large companies; worse, it’s also a crapshoot. Arensmeyer said, “Companies live in fear that if one or two employees get sick their whole cost structure will radically change.” No wonder that fewer than half the companies with under fifty employees insure their employees, and that half of uninsured workers work for small businesses or are self-employed. In fact, a full quarter of small-business owners are uninsured, too.

Obamacare changes all this. It provides tax credits to smaller businesses that want to insure their employees. And it requires “community rating” for small businesses, just as it does for individuals, sharply restricting insurers’ ability to charge a company more because it has employees with higher health costs. And small-business exchanges will in effect allow companies to pool their risks to get better rates. “You’re really taking the benefits that big companies enjoy, and letting small businesses tap into that,” Arensmeyer said. This may lower costs, and it will insure that small businesses can hire the best person for a job rather than worry about health issues.

The U.S. likes to think of itself as friendly to small businesses. But, as a 2009 study by the economists John Schmitt and Nathan Lane documented, our small-business sector is among the smallest in the developed world, and has one of the lowest rates of self-employment. One reason is that we’ve never had anything like national health insurance. In a saner world, changing this would be a reform that the “party of small business” would celebrate.

James Surowiecki: Why Obamacare is Good for Small Businesses : The New Yorker

i couldn't agree more. it always did strike me as anti-entrepreneur for someone to have to risk going without health insurance in order to start a small business. i work in an industry of freelancers, and a lot of people leave for safer jobs so they can have guaranteed insurance, especially once they have kids. i lived on catastrophic health insurance for years, being young and healthy, and took my chances (never got a physical for most of my 20s). i finally decided to buy real insurance when i got a higher paying position (all out of pocket, my company does not yet offer health insurance), and within a year i was seriously injured in a freak accident. i would have faced tens of thousands of dollars if not for my insurance. what if that had happened 2 years earlier? catastrophic only covers so much. i've had years of follow ups, check ups, CAT scans, tests, etc.

i bet you're going to see much more of the risk taking that leads to fantastic new and innovative companies once the ACA gets underway, and we'll see many more start ups, from bakeries to production companies, once the hurdle of "how do i do this and go without insurance for 3 years" is cleared.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by anitram

What can't be? The default happening or the Tea Party actually behaving as is described in the article?

How the Tea Party is behaving, hence my reference to Michelle Bachmann. I echo the sentiment that she's loony.

[nbcrusader]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

remember, most of the federal government is just unnecessary overhead.

also,

There's a Major Salmonella Outbreak During a Government Shutdown - Connor Simpson - The Atlantic Wire

Well, Obama did want to make the shutdown as painful as possible.

Good thing Obama kept the golf course at Andrews Airforce Base open and focused attention on the critical tasks of keeping WWII vets of the National Mall, preventing visitors from taking pictures in Yosemite (the government must prevent them from “recreating”), shuting down private businesses located inside government buildings (let’s kill the tax revenue), blocking off scenic vistas of Mount Rushmore (you can’t look at government land?), etc.



And, remember, there is plenty of dead weight overhead in government. Unless, of course, you want to spend the extra money so the government can provide great entertainment (courtesy of the GSA).

[nbcrusader]

Originally Posted by AEON

Most of this wealth was gained from taking advantage of the system, so it's time for the system take at least half of it back.

Do you have a real, factual basis for this?

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by nbcrusader

Well, Obama did want to make the shutdown as painful as possible.

Good thing Obama kept the golf course at Andrews Airforce Base open and focused attention on the critical tasks of keeping WWII vets of the National Mall, preventing visitors from taking pictures in Yosemite (the government must prevent them from “recreating”), shuting down private businesses located inside government buildings (let’s kill the tax revenue), blocking off scenic vistas of Mount Rushmore (you can’t look at government land?), etc.



And, remember, there is plenty of dead weight overhead in government. Unless, of course, you want to spend the extra money so the government can provide great entertainment (courtesy of the GSA).

Obama didn't shut down the government. the House GOP did.

once again: the House GOP shut down the government. Boehner told Stephanopolus on Sunday that the GOP and the WH had a deal for a clean continuing resolution, but then the GOP decided against it. because, "Obamacare!"

you seem proud of it, so at least own it.

[BoMac]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

i couldn't agree more. it always did strike me as anti-entrepreneur for someone to have to risk going without health insurance in order to start a small business. i work in an industry of freelancers, and a lot of people leave for safer jobs so they can have guaranteed insurance, especially once they have kids. i lived on catastrophic health insurance for years, being young and healthy, and took my chances (never got a physical for most of my 20s). i finally decided to buy real insurance when i got a higher paying position (all out of pocket, my company does not yet offer health insurance), and within a year i was seriously injured in a freak accident. i would have faced tens of thousands of dollars if not for my insurance. what if that had happened 2 years earlier? catastrophic only covers so much. i've had years of follow ups, check ups, CAT scans, tests, etc.

i bet you're going to see much more of the risk taking that leads to fantastic new and innovative companies once the ACA gets underway, and we'll see many more start ups, from bakeries to production companies, once the hurdle of "how do i do this and go without insurance for 3 years" is cleared.

As an outsider, this whole health care debate is still confounding. I do not, nor will I ever, understand this fear of offering affordable health care to everyone. Isn't it good for businesses and the economy if you have a healthy, productive workforce, one that is free from the stress and anxiety of knowing you're one unforeseen health crisis away from bankruptcy?

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by BoMac

As an outsider, this whole health care debate is still confounding. I do not, nor will I ever, understand this fear of offering affordable health care to everyone. Isn't it good for businesses and the economy if you have a healthy, productive workforce, one that is free from the stress and anxiety of knowing you're one unforeseen health crisis away from bankruptcy?

Because affordable health care to everyone sounds like socialism, which is the equivalent of communism, at least to many. Also, many feel they should not be obligated to pay for someone who smoked or drank too much and now have cancer, or ate wrong and now have diabetes. Why should they pay for someone else's mistakes? And then there's some who don't believe that people can actually file for bankruptcy because of medical treatment, even if they were financially stable prior to their illness. I'm just telling you what my conservative family and relatives, co-workers, and others I know are saying.

[nbcrusader]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Obama didn't shut down the government. the House GOP did.

once again: the House GOP shut down the government. Boehner told Stephanopolus on Sunday that the GOP and the WH had a deal for a clean continuing resolution, but then the GOP decided against it. because, "Obamacare!"

you seem proud of it, so at least own it.

Your post and my reply addressed the results of the government shutdown.

I guess you agree that Obama's response has been demonstrative of someone who doesn't know how to lead?

[anitram]

Originally Posted by nbcrusader

I guess you agree that Obama's response has been demonstrative of someone who doesn't know how to lead?

Obama is leading just fine. Maybe for those of you who are used to him bending over, it's suddenly a surprise.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by nbcrusader

Your post and my reply addressed the results of the government shutdown. I guess you agree that Obama's response has been demonstrative of someone who doesn't know how to lead?

Both of our posts showed results that are the fault of the GOP, not Obama. But you blamed Obama ... Why, I don't know.

You placed words in my mouth, and I'm not even sure what they mean.

Iwill say that Obama had been calm and steady, as per usual, in refusing to negotiate with extortionists ("give me your wallet or I'll shoot your dog.") I am fine with what he is doing, for now. Let the suicide caucus commit suicide.

It's too bad that so many people have to get hurt while they do so.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by nbcrusader

Do you have a real, factual basis for this?

One glaring, current example is the Big Bank caper. They were able to get the SEC to lift restrictions on short-selling 1 year before the Market Crash of 2008 (the SEC lifted the "Uptick Rule" and the banks and the largest clients made tons of money on short-selling into the Crash) - then after they made their money, the restrictions were conveniently put back in (Rule 201). Not to mention the deep relationship between government and banks like Goldman Sachs (do I seriously need to list how many former Goldman Sachs employees that have held crucial government positions?)

In the end, banks were able to consolidate power, eliminate competition (Wachovia, Merril Lynch, Bear Stearns, Washington Mutual...etc) and increase holdings (including millions of homes).

Of course, the banks are comprised of executives, shareholders, board members, traders, esteemed clients...etc - and all have done extremely well navigating the "system" they created (with the help of their buddies in congress and in key government positions) that allowed them to rake in billions (if not trillions) of dollars while the rest of the world nearly burned to the ground. But that's okay if it did burn - because they owned the companies (esp. AIG) that would cover any losses that government would not.

Brilliant, huh? A win-win scenario for the Big Banks no matter what. How can this be possible without government endorsement? Heck, it's hard enough for a business to get a liquor license - and you're going to convince me that the government (both Democrats and Republicans) wasn't deeply involved in this current gap between the wealthy and poor?

[deep]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Obama didn't shut down the government. the House GOP did.

How can you argue with 38 likes?????

[anitram]

Also worth mentioning is the approach to taxation of capital gains and carried interest (particularly egregious) which benefit the super wealthy disproportionately in the former case and entirely in the latter.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by deep

How can you argue with 38 likes?????

Still less than the 44 "dislikes" for the repeal of the ACA.

[deep]

About 75-80 % of the people I know, am related to and work with are GOP or conservative. I will say many expected Romney to win in 2012. they were tuned in to Fox, Limbaugh and the like and based on that reporting, coverage plus "wishful thinking" they saw a clear path to a Romney win.
I will also say to their credit?, they did not claim a 'stolen' election. They mostly admitted that they failed to consult objective polls and surveys and depended too much on their own sources.



So now I am surprised to see how little they have leaned from that embarrassing ass-kicking. Again they are only drinking their own kool-aid and talking among themselves and are diluting themselves into thinking they are winning this shut-down, debt-ceiling manufactured crisis.


Republican Party Favorability Sinks to Record Low

[AEON]

Here's another example of how to get rich in America - get a federal government contract!

Digital Trends

The exact cost to build Healthcare.gov, according to U.S. government records, appears to have been $634,320,919, which we paid to a company you probably never heard of: CGI Federal. The company originally won the contract back in 2011, but at that time, the cost was expected to run “up to” $93.7 million – still a chunk of change, but nothing near where it apparently ended up.

We paid $634 million for the Obamacare sites and all we got was this lousy 404

But the fact that Healthcare.gov can’t do the one job it was built to do isn’t the most infuriating part of this debacle – it’s that we, the taxpayers, seem to have forked up more than $634 million of the federal purse to build the digital equivalent of a rock.