Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a troll by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldnt be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill, is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Obamacare, Otherwise Known as The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

    For profits are not allowed to compete across state lines either.
    When for-profits are allowed to compete across state lines under a new system, we'll see if they include non-profits under that regulation. We'll also see if there are other restrictions on non-profits, that for-profits avoid.

    ?


    • Originally posted by radcentr View Post

      When for-profits are allowed to compete across state lines under a new system, we'll see if they include non-profits under that regulation. We'll also see if there are other restrictions on non-profits, that for-profits avoid.
      Now you are just trying to buy trouble. There is no indication that non-profits have been or will be treated any differently than for profits.

      ?


      • ....to counter the media narrative that Americans would suffer under the repeal and replacement of Obamacare, the White House issued a series of statements from people who have suffered because of it.


        Neverminding how many people gave up looking for work because of what obama and his "care" did to our economy and job market !!

        The fact that obama and his crappy "care" is hurting people.

        Big time.

        The most interesting thing about it is how the media tries to have us ignore this fact & instead repeats over and over how "sumnumber million" people won't have 'health insurance' if our new president succeeds !!

        Good !!

        Not everyone WANTS "health insurance." Not everyone NEEDS "health insurance."

        As I pointed out earlier and so many times before, insurance is a scam, at best a gamble and generally a rip-off. The govt. has zero legal right or authority to force Americans to buy such a thing.

        Believing they do is ignorance, stupidity or insanity
        - take your pick.


        I think in most cases, of course some people are always going to choose in a free society to not purchase something I mean, we live in a country of 320 million people at some point, you cant force a product or a good down people(s) [throats] in a free society.

        --------------------------------------------------------

        SEAN SPICER SMACKS CNN AT PRESS BRIEFING
        'Get outside' and talk to Obamacare sufferers

        Its one thing to have a card. Its another thing to walk into a doctors office and them to tell you we no longer accept Medicaid anymore. Thats not care.

        Spicer made the key clarification a number of times that the presidents goal was not to provide government-guaranteed coverage for every American, but to make affordable healthcare available to every American who wants it.

        I think in most cases, of course some people are always going to choose in a free society to not purchase something I mean, we live in a country of 320 million people at some point, you cant force a product or a good down people in a free society.

        He pointed to Obamacares increasing unpopularity with consumers, noting, Youve got almost 20 million people in America who have said that they dont want Obamacare and theyll either pay a penalty or will apply for a hardship.

        Perhaps to counter the media narrative that Americans would suffer under the repeal and replacement of Obamacare, the White House issued a series of statements from people who have suffered because of it.

        On Monday, President Donald J. Trump welcomed to the Roosevelt Room individuals who have experienced significant hardship as a result of Obamacares poor coverage and rising prices.


        [ this is a very short list ]

        The individuals in attendance included:

        Ms. Kim Sertich of Arizona, whose health insurance has been cancelled three times since Obamacare became law. The plans now available to her have limited networks and high deductibles. Even worse, she will only have one insurer to choose from in 2017.

        Mrs. Carrie Couey of Colorado, a mother of six from a cattle ranching family whose youngest son is autistic. The pre-Obamacare cost for her familys insurance was $17,000 per year. After Obamacare became law, her insurance costs skyrocketed to $52,500 per year for a lower quality plan. Additionally, the cost for workers compensation insurance for her businesss employees increased from approximately $17,000 per year to more than $70,000 per year.

        Mr. Elias Seife of Florida, who has had to change his and his wifes health insurance every year for the past few years because his premiums have increased 30-40 percent annually, and the deductibles have risen even more sharply. Mr. Seife said that the middle class has been particularly hard-hit by Obamacare.

        Ms. Brittany Ivey of Georgia, a working mother whose family has struggled under Obamacare. Ms. Ivey was working part-time at a small business that provided her family with health insurance until Obamacare raised her premiums sharply. This drove the Ivey family into the individual market, where a mid-level plan cost 65 percent of her monthly gross income, even accounting for a federal subsidy.

        Mr. Greg Knox of Ohio, the owner of Knox Machinery and Chairman of the Dayton Region Manufacturers Association. The businesses in Mr. Knoxs association have been significantly affected by Obamacares rising prices. Mr. Knox expressed optimism that President Trump will return free market principles to our Nations healthcare system, which will benefit consumers by increasing options and lowering costs.

        Mr. Joel Brown of Tennessee, a farmer whose costs for catastrophic coverage has spiked in the wake of Obamacare, from $119 per month to more than $500 per month. As a result, Mr. Brown was forced to settle for a much less desirable plan provided through his church, which cost him $280 per month.

        Dr. Manny Sethi of Tennessee, founder of Healthy Tennessee, a non-profit organization designed to promote preventative healthcare. Dr. Sethi has seen first-hand Obamacares negative effects on the medical profession. As an orthopedic trauma surgeon and Assistant Professor at Vanderbilt University, Dr. Sethi is well aware of how Obamacare has harmed patient care across the country.

        Dr. Robin Armstrong of Texas, a medical doctor whose wife is a breast cancer survivor. Dr. Armstrong strongly opposes Obamacare because its rising premiums and deductibles have hurt his patients. Dr. Armstrong told President Trump that he is excited about the reforms the President is pursuing, and believes they will drastically improve Americas healthcare system.

        Hon. Stan Summers of Utah, a local county commissioner whose family has endured significant hardship as a result of Obamacare. Mr. Summers wife has been very sick and his son has struggled with a rare disease. Their insurance costs have skyrocketed as a result of Obamacare.

        Mr. Louis Brown of Virginia, a 35-year-old attorney who currently works for the Christ Medicus Foundation, a Catholic healthcare foundation. In 2009, as Obamacare was moving through Congress, Mr. Brown was a staffer at the Democratic National Committee. He told President Trump that after much prayer and soul searching, he resigned from the DNC because he could not support a party that wanted to include taxpayer funding of abortion in Obamacare. Today, Mr. Brown supports the reforms in the American Health Care Act.

        Ms. Gina Sell of Wisconsin, a young nurse who has had to work much longer hours to afford her increased health insurance premium under Obamacare. In fact, her premium now costs her more than her mortgage.



        http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/spicer-sm...cat_orig=money



        & here...

        https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...ctims-n2298136



        Democrats don't care about whether their ideas hurt people or not. Forcing their ideas upon us is what is important to them.

        ...why obama had to pass his "care" during the witching hours of Christmas eve !!!

        They HAVE to be forced upon us because they're ideas that no one wants to be forced to abide by

        Why ?

        Because they take away our freedoms and give all power to a small band of powerful government fascists !!!

        ?


        • Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
          Is it too late ? Has obama won ? Has he "fundamentally transformed" America ?

          Very likely, especially if you look at what is going on.

          ----------------------------------------------------------------

          Were living in a post-constitutional America. The good news is that with your help and diligence we can reclaim the nation our founders intended.

          Meanwhile, we must be willing to admit the truth: President Obama is winning despite our unexpected GOP victory last November. Like it or not, his presidency was successful. We need look no further than the current health-care debate in D.C. to realize it. Thanks to President Trumps election victory, well be able to scale back most, if not all of Obamas executive orders. What will be difficult to get rid of is Americans expectations of their government.

          The political center has shifted to the left, and those of us on the right moved with it. America as a whole has become much more dependent upon government.


          [ exactly what we didn't want !! ]

          Dont get me wrong! Theres no doubt Trumpcare will be demonstrably better than Obamacare on all counts. I understand there will never be a perfect bill that makes everyone happy. The individual mandate will be gone, and voters will be spared at least a trillion dollars in tax penalties. However, that still misses the larger point. Just 18 months ago the Republican Party was an opposition party. We were talking about how to repeal Obamacare and get the federal government out of our health-care decisions altogether. Somewhere along the line the argument morphed into the words repeal and replace. It didnt take long for conservatives to accept the lefts premise that the federal government should play a role in our health-care decisions.

          [ They do not belong there. In any respect ! ]

          At one point the left had us on the ropes when Obamacare passed. This time it appears we have them on the ropes. Nonetheless, I cant help question whether were just playing favorites when it comes to our political parties instead of considering the tough question: What impact will a federally devised health-care plan have on my freedom?

          Let me be clear: Whether or not Trumpcare is better than Obamacare is not my argument. It is. My concern is that as Americans perhaps weve grown so dependent upon government help on both sides of the aisle that were no longer capable of discerning freedom.


          [ That is the question; Are we or aren't we ? ]

          I dont have all of the answers for the 22 million victims that currently receive subsidized health-care coverage from Obamacare, but I do have some suggestions:

          First off, stop vilifying doctors and wealth in the public square so that more young people are inclined to become doctors. As it stands right now, we have a shortage of doctors in America. Secondly, speed up the process for FDA approval of medicines and allow alternative medicines into the market place. Thirdly, we need to curtail the ability of perpetual victims to sue doctors frivolously. Some doctors dont need to be doctors and should be sued out of the profession, but most perform a good service. Lastly, open up competition across state lines! I believe most people will be inclined to patronage local insurance businesses. However, wouldnt it be nice to know that you have the upper-hand with insurance giants for a change?

          In short, heres my solution: Why dont we repeal Obamacare and replace it with freedom?


          [ Or have we been taught to fear freedom so much we just won't tolerate it ? ]

          "Man will ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants." - Benjamin Franklin

          http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/obama-won...ill-proves-it/
          And that's why I voted for Ted Cruz. BOOM!

          ?


          • Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

            Now you are just trying to buy trouble. There is no indication that non-profits have been or will be treated any differently than for profits.
            Non-profits have been treated differently than for-profits. Try a google on "banks vs credit unions". That will give you the range of bias, depending on whether the banking or credit union industry is complaining or defending regulations. One thing both sides agree on, however. The credit union/financial cooperative industry must operate under different regulations than the banks, as determined by the gov't.

            You already knew this.

            ?


            • Originally posted by radcentr View Post

              Non-profits have been treated differently than for-profits. Try a google on "banks vs credit unions". That will give you the range of bias, depending on whether the banking or credit union industry is complaining or defending regulations. One thing both sides agree on, however. The credit union/financial cooperative industry must operate under different regulations than the banks, as determined by the gov't.

              You already knew this.
              How did we get on to Credit Unions? I thought we were talking about Obamacare.

              ?


              • We are talking about the gov't. regulation of non-profits vs. for-profits. I hope you are right, OMD, if you think Congress will open up non-profits to compete across state lines when it comes to health care. Even better if it opens up all other regulations to be substantially equal between non & for-profits. Based on their record with non-profits and financial services, I am doubtful.

                ?


                • Originally posted by radcentr View Post

                  Non-profits have been treated differently than for-profits. Try a google on "banks vs credit unions". That will give you the range of bias, depending on whether the banking or credit union industry is complaining or defending regulations. One thing both sides agree on, however. The credit union/financial cooperative industry must operate under different regulations than the banks, as determined by the gov't.

                  You already knew this.
                  We've got a new gov't in case you haven't noticed.
                  Last edited by msc; 03-16-2017, 03:24 AM.

                  ?


                  • Originally posted by msc View Post

                    We've got a new gov't in case you haven't noticed.
                    Yes, I've noticed. I've also expressed my doubt this gov't. will be any different than past admins, regarding expanded participation of non-profits in the overall health care sector.

                    ?


                    • Originally posted by radcentr View Post

                      Yes, I've noticed. I've also expressed my doubt this gov't. will be any different than past admins, regarding expanded participation of non-profits in the overall health care sector.
                      I have my doubts too, that this gov't will not fall prey to the health insurance entitlements given on the working mans dime. I have doubts about the entire replacement plan working advantageously to the taxpayer. I agree with many elements of the proposal, but as long as the gov't is in the health INSURANCE business, I just don't see how it could work.

                      But as I'm doubting, I can't rule out that the mass changes being made and intended to be made in this gov't, will exclude addressing non profits differently. Who know's, you maybe right, but IMO it's not reasonable to be firm on that assumption.
                      Last edited by msc; 03-18-2017, 07:14 AM.

                      ?


                      • Originally posted by msc View Post

                        I have my doubts too, that this gov't will not fall prey to the health insurance entitlements given on the working mans dime. I have doubts about the entire replacement plan working advantageously to the taxpayer. I agree with many elements of the proposal, but as long as the gov't is in the health INSURANCE business, I just don't see how it could work.

                        But as I'm doubting, I can't rule out that the mass changes being made and intended to be made in this gov't, will exclude addressing non profits differently. Who know's, you maybe right, but IMO it's not reasonable to be firm on that assumption.
                        I wouldn't bet large that I'm right, because I want to believe that non-profits will be given a chance. Even if I'm generally biased toward the left, it would be nice to see those obstacles removed, even if it is a right wing political movement that does it.

                        ?


                        • Originally posted by radcentr View Post

                          I wouldn't bet large that I'm right, because I want to believe that non-profits will be given a chance. Even if I'm generally biased toward the left, it would be nice to see those obstacles removed, even if it is a right wing political movement that does it.
                          Just what "chance" have the non-profits been denied? The government financed and set up multiple co-ops with Obamacare, functioning under the same rules as the insurance companies and all of them failed after spending the original millions they were awarded to start up. You have this fairy tail belief that people who work for non-profits will somehow be able to do something that for profits cannot. It's like the belief that Communism can work if we just do it right.

                          ?


                          • Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

                            Just what "chance" have the non-profits been denied? The government financed and set up multiple co-ops with Obamacare, functioning under the same rules as the insurance companies and all of them failed after spending the original millions they were awarded to start up. You have this fairy tail belief that people who work for non-profits will somehow be able to do something that for profits cannot. It's like the belief that Communism can work if we just do it right.
                            Non-profits have worked to provide health care, and survived as well as for-profits in many markets before Obamacare. While I don't believe non-profits are always better, it is obvious that people working for non-profits can indeed do something that for-profits cannot do: Bill me for medical services without also charging me for their organization's profit margin.

                            Since a lot of for-profit companies bugged out of many state markets under ACA, it should be no surprise that non-profits failed. They couldn't operate under the massive inflation within the medical sector, just as they couldn't deal with some of the conditions or requirements under ACA. If that convinces so many for-profits to get out, why should non-profits be different?

                            ?


                            • And RINOCare is dead. Good riddance.

                              This was a completely unnecessary debacle. They passed a repeal and put it on Obama's desk a year or so ago. All they had/have to do is pass it again. Follow up with a few tweaks to increase competitiveness, and we could have put this whole nightmare behind us.

                              Trump is blaming the democrats, and not throwing the Freedom Caucus, who made him and the Congressional majority possible, under the bus, which might earn him a bronze medal. But if he wants to win, bigely, as he would say, he has to back a clean repeal. That's what he ran on.
                              Last edited by Commodore; 03-24-2017, 04:59 PM.

                              ?


                              • ...
                                Originally posted by Mark Levin
                                "Mr. Ryan, you continue with your mantra, that the GOP is now a governing party not an opposition party. These are words that apply to you. You failed to develop a plan that embraced market capitalism and you did not involve the GOP conservatives in the early phases of drafting your plan. You tried to force this plan through, adopted a few changes, but mostly continued with big-government ideas and much of Obamacare's essential elements. The failure to govern is on the GOP leadership. And the failure to uphold the repeal promise with an actual repeal of most of Obamacare is also on the GOP leadership. These troubling circumstances could have been avoided." -Levin

                                ?

                                Working...
                                X