Oh, you are very welcome. It means utterly ignorant one. Well, it hasn't started yet. Your title suits you well.
LaSalle stays high but never misses a double entendre. Hint hint, you said ignoramus. I said, I don't know what it means.... muah. Love you man!
If the goal is to avoid something that's dysfunctional, then we're fucked. Government is dysfunctional, businesses are dysfunctional, political parties are dysfunctional, insurance companies are dysfunctional, etc. We should just all roll over and die now if that's the goal. It is but one method of enrollment. People have until March 31st to get it done. If the number of people who have already attempted to enroll is any indication, there will be plenty of folks enrolled by then. In a couple weeks they will have the website humming and it will be on to the next GOP talking point about how millions of Americans getting insurance coverage for the first time in their lives while reducing the Federal Deficit is destroying America despite the plan's massive successes in Massachusetts, Germany, Switzerland and soon to be America.
I think the key word in what you mentioned was Massachusetts. I think it had value if left to the states to roll out. They way they went about it is a massive cluster fuck that could have been easily avoided. Its laughable at the job they have done for 600 Mil. In any case, what is troubling is that the penalty is less than the insurance Makes no sense. Whats more is that I haven't seen any indication on the penalty funds being mandated back to insurance companies to help keep premiums low.
Winston, this is a partisan issue for me. Journalists have been saying this about administrations for as long as I can remember. Further, you and I have discussed at length the need, at certain parts of history, a need to relinquish a few rights in order to accomplish the greater good. We've also discussed the need to put limitations on the time frame which our rights are given back. I don't think you're thinking very clearly about the ACA. The web site issues are a hiccup, nothing more. Of course, the goal of the ACA was to get people signed up quickly.....it's only been three weeks. If these technical problems persist I do believe they should delay the individual mandate by as long as it takes to get the web site up and running. That said, all of this bluster about the "trainwreck" are misguided and, at best, wishful thinking on the part of the Republicans. Especially when you consider that the technical issues the web site have had are from being over loaded with people trying to get on the web site. What should this tell you? Not that it's a trainwreck and nobody likes it......people are desperate for affordable healthcare.....or any healthcare at all.
How do you know it hasn't worked, Tiga? It hasn't even been implemented fully yet? There ain't no denying that the web site has been a catastrophe and if they don't get it fixed by the end of the year I'll join the chorus to delay the implementation so that folks have adequate time to make an informed decision. yes, grasshopper, you are learning......
And therein is what I base my premise on. If they can't even get the enrollment to work how in the phuck you think they'll manage the entire thing- which was a Republican concnern. Check this though, it's being reported that 6 Democrats up for re-election in 2014 are now wanting to extend the individual mandate- which essentially funds it. They're starting to see they may have a difficult time defending it. I know red demands links but I don't have one to back the 6 Lib jumping ship but here's a lil sumpin. Supports the what the Republicans wanted, minimally, to delay it for a year like they did for a certain group. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/10/calls-to-delay-obamacare-mandate-divide-democrats-2/
