Nearly 1 in 5 Obamacare waivers go to restaurants, nightclubs, hotels in Pelosi

[Quantum Windbag]

This might come as surprise to you, but House districts aren't divided into districts having roughly equal numbers of restaurants, night clubs, and hotels which offer mini-medical plans- they're divided into districts having roughly equal numbers of people.

No, no surprise to me. But you don't see even a little bit of shenanigans here? Really?

More employers have to apply for waivers in San Francisco because more employers provide health care to their employees because they are required to by city law. Read above post. There's no Shenanigans, its just more right wing conspiracy nut bullshit.

Let me make this very simple for you.

If they already provide insurance, they don't need a waiver. Why give them waivers if they don't need them?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually, by disagreeing that Obamacare is a bad way to make law, yes, you did say that.

LOL, Incorrect. This would only be true if nobody in this country wanted healthcare reform and if everyone was against this law. But that is far from the case.

There are laws I want, too, but I damn sure want to keep an eye on them while they're made.

What happened to the left? During the Sixties, not a one of you trusted the government. Now you want the government to live your lives for you.

Seriously, someone explain that to me.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

If they already provide insurance, they don't need a waiver. Why give them waivers if they don't need them?

You don't even understand what the fuck is going on, do you?

The new law requires that health insurance plans adhere to certain standards. IF YOU DON'T OFFER ONE then it doesn't have to adhere to those standards because it doesn't fucking exist moron. If you do offer one, and it doesn't adhere to the standards, you can apply for a temporary waiver. Many of the companies that offer health insurance to their employers that fall into this category are companies offering "mini-med" plans. Since the San Francisco law only requires that employers spend a certain amount per employee hour worked on health care - they will of course wind up with these mini-meds that don't comply, because they are the cheapest.

So no, to answer your question, a company that did not provide any health insurance would NOT have a need for such a waiver.

 

[Meister]

The new law requires that health insurance plans adhere to certain standards. IF YOU DON'T OFFER ONE then it doesn't have to adhere to those standards because it doesn't fucking exist moron.

IF YOU DON'T OFFER ONE then it doesn't have to adhere to those standards because it doesn't fucking exist(,) moron.

You need to use a comma, and your calling someone else a moron?

 

[daveman]

I am surprised these right wing ideologues would want to post this stuff, because once you get to the bottom of it, you see why this bill was needed. It shines a bright light on the scurrilous insurance cartels who they worship. They will never understand that there is a built in conflict between health care and for profit insurance. Health care will never fit a 'free market' model. The best that can be crafted is laws that limit the cartel's death panels...Insurance cartels are not in the health care business. They are in the profit business, and the best way to increase profit is to collect premiums and find ways NOT to pay claims.

Can you show me in the Constitution where health care is a right? Kthnxbai.

Ah, the old show me where it's in the constitution. OK, show me where corporations are in the Constitution? So life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege. Thank you for telling me you are a right wing scum bag.

Do keep up. "Pursuit of happiness". You're guaranteed the pursuit, not happiness itself. If you want it, you have to get off your ass and get it for yourself.

The sooner you realize YOU are responsible for your life, the better. But thank you for telling me you are a whiny left-wing crybaby.

 

[Annie]

I don't want to wade through the entire thread tonight, I'm tired and stressed. If this has already been posted, my apologies in advance. I thought I'd check Snopes when I heard that Pelosi's husband was heavily invested in food industry and related. While Snopes goes beyond the need, they try to be even handed, but the handwriting is there if any investigative reporters would track it down:

snopes.com: American Samoa Minimum Wage

 

[Meister]

Can you show me in the Constitution where health care is a right? Kthnxbai.

Ah, the old show me where it's in the constitution. OK, show me where corporations are in the Constitution? So life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege. Thank you for telling me you are a right wing scum bag.

Do keep up. "Pursuit of happiness". You're guaranteed the pursuit, not happiness itself. If you want it, you have to get off your ass and get it for yourself.

The sooner you realize YOU are responsible for your life, the better. But thank you for telling me you are a whiny left-wing crybaby.

Correct, your given the opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Your not guaranteed these things.

 

[daveman]

LOL, Incorrect. This would only be true if nobody in this country wanted healthcare reform and if everyone was against this law. But that is far from the case.

There are laws I want, too, but I damn sure want to keep an eye on them while they're made.

What happened to the left? During the Sixties, not a one of you trusted the government. Now you want the government to live your lives for you.

Seriously, someone explain that to me.

A rational explanation is not forthcoming.

 

[daveman]

Ah, the old show me where it's in the constitution. OK, show me where corporations are in the Constitution? So life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege. Thank you for telling me you are a right wing scum bag.

Do keep up. "Pursuit of happiness". You're guaranteed the pursuit, not happiness itself. If you want it, you have to get off your ass and get it for yourself.

The sooner you realize YOU are responsible for your life, the better. But thank you for telling me you are a whiny left-wing crybaby.

Correct, your given the opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Your not guaranteed these things.

Constitution, schmonstitution. Those old rich white guys just weren't nuanced enough.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

district...

So just how does this work again I thought you leftist pukes told us the NHC was thing to do better then brie and tea you said. Leaves me wondering why more are exempted then accepted.

Health Care Law | San Francisco | Nancy Pelosi | The Daily Caller

Why The Huge Spike In Healthcare Exemptions? | The Blaze

The Obamabots could care less about all the corruption in the health care bill.

 

[jillian]

There are laws I want, too, but I damn sure want to keep an eye on them while they're made.

What happened to the left? During the Sixties, not a one of you trusted the government. Now you want the government to live your lives for you.

Seriously, someone explain that to me.

A rational explanation is not forthcoming.

perhaps because the assessment is inaccurate?

seems to me government forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term is far more invasive than any of the annoyances the right complains about on a regular basis... like seat belts and registering guns, and cutting down on the amount of salt in prepared foods.... or having to purchase health insurance like you do auto insurance.

just sayin'

but good to see you, dave.

 

[daveman]

Seriously, someone explain that to me.

A rational explanation is not forthcoming.

perhaps because the assessment is inaccurate?

seems to me government forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term is far more invasive than any of the annoyances the right complains about on a regular basis... like seat belts and registering guns, and cutting down on the amount of salt in prepared foods.... or having to purchase health insurance like you do auto insurance.

just sayin'

but good to see you, dave.

Hi, Jillian. How you been?

However, you do not counter my assertion. In the Sixties, the left wanted nothing from the government, and trusted nothing the government said.

Now you want the government to tell people how much salt they can have, you want the government to know how many guns everyone has, you want the government to pass rules and regulations "for the public good".

Would Abbie Hoffman have demanded the Feds crack down on salt in TV dinners?

Face it: Radicals grew up and turned into The Man.

 

[jillian]

A rational explanation is not forthcoming.

perhaps because the assessment is inaccurate?

seems to me government forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term is far more invasive than any of the annoyances the right complains about on a regular basis... like seat belts and registering guns, and cutting down on the amount of salt in prepared foods.... or having to purchase health insurance like you do auto insurance.

just sayin'

but good to see you, dave.

Hi, Jillian. How you been?

However, you do not counter my assertion. In the Sixties, the left wanted nothing from the government, and trusted nothing the government said.

Now you want the government to tell people how much salt they can have, you want the government to know how many guns everyone has, you want the government to pass rules and regulations "for the public good".

Would Abbie Hoffman have demanded the Feds crack down on salt in TV dinners?

Face it: Radicals grew up and turned into The Man.

i'm excellent. thanks so much.

I don't think your assertion is correct. In the 60's it seems to me what people wanted was social justice... which requires government intervention to secure; an end to war; reproductive and marital choice. there was a lot of rhetoric about 'don't trust anyone over 30", but they voted... and they voted for people who believed in the power of government. no one ever said "the scariest thing you can hear is 'hi, i'm from the government and i'm here to help" until that was glibly said by ronald reagan... as he sought a government paycheck. but that's for another discussion.

i think abbie hoffman wouldn't have much approved of government still running the 'war on drugs'.

it didn't take long for radicals to turn into the man. by the time i represented jerry rubin , he was the biggest conservative yuppie you'd ever have met. but i suspect that was a function of wealth and he forgot where he came from.

i think you'll also find there was a difference between people who were anarchists and people who were liberals.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If they already provide insurance, they don't need a waiver. Why give them waivers if they don't need them?

You don't even understand what the fuck is going on, do you?

The new law requires that health insurance plans adhere to certain standards. IF YOU DON'T OFFER ONE then it doesn't have to adhere to those standards because it doesn't fucking exist moron. If you do offer one, and it doesn't adhere to the standards, you can apply for a temporary waiver. Many of the companies that offer health insurance to their employers that fall into this category are companies offering "mini-med" plans. Since the San Francisco law only requires that employers spend a certain amount per employee hour worked on health care - they will of course wind up with these mini-meds that don't comply, because they are the cheapest.

So no, to answer your question, a company that did not provide any health insurance would NOT have a need for such a waiver.

And you are trying to argue I do not understand what is going on.

Why are the waivers being granted in the first place? What would happen if they were not granted? Answer those questions and we will then discuss the other stuff you have wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Seriously, someone explain that to me.

A rational explanation is not forthcoming.

perhaps because the assessment is inaccurate?

seems to me government forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term is far more invasive than any of the annoyances the right complains about on a regular basis... like seat belts and registering guns, and cutting down on the amount of salt in prepared foods.... or having to purchase health insurance like you do auto insurance.

just sayin'

but good to see you, dave.

It is not accurate? Were you around in the 60s when "The Man" was the last thing any liberal wanted to be associated with?

 

[Bfgrn]

Can you show me in the Constitution where health care is a right? Kthnxbai.

Ah, the old show me where it's in the constitution. OK, show me where corporations are in the Constitution? So life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege. Thank you for telling me you are a right wing scum bag.

Do keep up. "Pursuit of happiness". You're guaranteed the pursuit, not happiness itself. If you want it, you have to get off your ass and get it for yourself.

The sooner you realize YOU are responsible for your life, the better. But thank you for telling me you are a whiny left-wing crybaby.

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

 

[daveman]

perhaps because the assessment is inaccurate?

seems to me government forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy to term is far more invasive than any of the annoyances the right complains about on a regular basis... like seat belts and registering guns, and cutting down on the amount of salt in prepared foods.... or having to purchase health insurance like you do auto insurance.

just sayin'

but good to see you, dave.

Hi, Jillian. How you been?

However, you do not counter my assertion. In the Sixties, the left wanted nothing from the government, and trusted nothing the government said.

Now you want the government to tell people how much salt they can have, you want the government to know how many guns everyone has, you want the government to pass rules and regulations "for the public good".

Would Abbie Hoffman have demanded the Feds crack down on salt in TV dinners?

Face it: Radicals grew up and turned into The Man.

i'm excellent. thanks so much.

I don't think your assertion is correct. In the 60's it seems to me what people wanted was social justice... which requires government intervention to secure; an end to war; reproductive and marital choice. there was a lot of rhetoric about 'don't trust anyone over 30", but they voted... and they voted for people who believed in the power of government. no one ever said "the scariest thing you can hear is 'hi, i'm from the government and i'm here to help" until that was glibly said by ronald reagan... as he sought a government paycheck. but that's for another discussion.

i think abbie hoffman wouldn't have much approved of government still running the 'war on drugs'.

it didn't take long for radicals to turn into the man. by the time i represented jerry rubin , he was the biggest conservative yuppie you'd ever have met. but i suspect that was a function of wealth and he forgot where he came from.

i think you'll also find there was a difference between people who were anarchists and people who were liberals.

Bill Ayers never has given up his radicalism. He's been quite busy passing it on.

 

[daveman]

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

Gasp. A leftist wanting something he didn't earn. I'm shocked.

Your impotent whining aside, the Constitution doesn't authorize the government to pay for your healthcare. If you want government healthcare, perhaps you should move to Cuba.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

...after your career as a secret operative for the CIA and while you were dating your girlfriend, Morgan Fairchild.

 

[Meister]

Ah, the old show me where it's in the constitution. OK, show me where corporations are in the Constitution? So life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege. Thank you for telling me you are a right wing scum bag.

Do keep up. "Pursuit of happiness". You're guaranteed the pursuit, not happiness itself. If you want it, you have to get off your ass and get it for yourself.

The sooner you realize YOU are responsible for your life, the better. But thank you for telling me you are a whiny left-wing crybaby.

The Declaration of Independence is the seminal document of what America aspired to be. It was the pretext of every document and action that followed; the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and actual governance. Thomas Jefferson rejected the divine right of kings and recognized that every man has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, that it is not granted by the state, but granted by our creator.

The first God given right is LIFE. Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are contingent on that first right. There can be no life without your health.

If health care is a privilege that only the wealthy can afford, we have rejected and undermined what America was founded on, and returned to the divine right of kings.

I can only laugh at your attempt to insult me. I'm sure my numerous years making six figures contributes to my laughter.

Oh brother,

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Why are the waivers being granted in the first place? What would happen if they were not granted?

The idea is that some providers are going to need more time to come into compliance.

Answer those questions and we will then discuss the other stuff you have wrong.

I've got nothing wrong. You're the shit for brains that was telling me a non-provider of health care would need to get a waiver.