There was a freeze last year? My premiums went up 10%. I'm expecting 10-20% this year because insurance companies are being hit with all these extra expenses. There is nothing to keep them from passing on those costs.
There was a freeze in rate adjustments from August 2008 to Jan 2010 while HCR was about to get worked on and in the works. (end half of FY08 to close to the end of FY09)
Did your company change policies or alter the terms of their policy? Because that was allowed, but you likely would be getting a better policy out of the hike as well. [For example if your company was proactively raising anything that was under the min coverage levels required a few years in the future - that was OK during the freeze]
And very little cost is being tossed onto the insurance companies this year outside of special pools (i.e. the high risk pool) - and since they have to keep pools explicitly separate, not one iota of the increased costs are going to touch existing pools - lest the insurance companies want to risk ridiculous fines if it's caught when their books are audited for compliance.
The part about cost increases is actually there in the CBO link above and explicitly goes over the places where cost will increase and why - and if you see anything over 10% your company is bucking the average by almost double since the average is at 5.5% for FY10. Please read the actual source materials more often and Boehner talking points less often.
[And of course an interesting note in that link is that many employers were running much higher than the maximum tax benefit contribution for health insurance, and many have scaled that back during the recession - the important thing is the TOTAL COST OF THE PLAN - if employers next year got a 150% deduction of their contribution to employee health care with no cap, they'd obviously all switch over to paying 100% for every employee, but the policies would still cost exactly the same regardless of how much the employer covered portion is]
Hopefully any more discussion of individual insurance policies will include the full data on the binder rather than just what the employee contribution is, because the latter is HIGHLY subject to employer manipulation. (especially in professional fields where higher than the tax benefit max contribution is a commonplace benefit used to attract employees - i.e. Google circa 2006 was actually paying 100% of their employee premiums amongst their professional staff - that's around a 400% hike if they decided to drop down to the max tax benefit tier of coverage! [IIRC it's 25% where tax benefit maxes generally - but been out of doing that paperwork for 4 years come April - so take that with a grain of salt])
I'm fairly positive that Palin will try, what with her new show (that probably won't help her, by the way), but I doubt she would be elected.
She's become far too publicized, and tried to become that way, which has only made her lose political respect.
I disagree that it's impossible that she'd win if she ran - but if she did, it would be bad for the Republicans long term - both parties need to be moving back towards the center not the fringe. [Note that I'm of the opinion that VP choice can temper someone not too overboard if utilized well]
Yet rents are increasing because houses still aren't priced correctly. People don't want to hear it, but frankly the houses need to come down another 40-50% before a new batch of would be buyers can afford them.
Rent is increasing because all these people that are defaulting on their house can afford to pay rent. so they are renting whatever they can get.
you have a flooded renters market right now. plus they won't qualify for a home loan again because they defaulted on their first one.
It depends on the area that you live in. that might be true in CA or NY but in FL no housing prices are actuall below what they should be. my house is almost worth what i owe on it. I looked into a refi and can't get one.
I'm fairly positive that Palin will try, what with her new show (that probably won't help her, by the way), but I doubt she would be elected.
She's become far too publicized, and tried to become that way, which has only made her lose political respect.
i think she will try. I think her show will only help her really. if not for the only reason to give people a deeper look at her personal life.
The media made her out to be stupid like many other things they said about her that isn't the case.
i agree she has a long way to go, but if she does it correct she could make a good attempt. depending on who is running she doesn't have my vote anyway.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
The media made her out to be stupid like many other things they said about her that isn't the case.
I mean, I tried to like Palin after the McCain campaign's announcement, but no, she's a moron. She inspires no confidence in the American people, she only harmed the McCain campaign in the eyes of moderates, she's not someone the Republican party wants to have as a leading voice.
I mean, I tried to like Palin after the McCain campaign's announcement, but no, she's a moron. She inspires no confidence in the American people, she only harmed the McCain campaign in the eyes of moderates, she's not someone the Republican party wants to have as a leading voice.
I agree that some moderates don't like her which is why she won't win the nomination, but she is very good at engerizing the base. what she is doing now is where she is suppose to be at and that is generating excitement and getting people out to the polls to vote.
you have to admit she generates huge crowds when she goes to speak somewhere.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Snooki draws crowds too, I wouldn't recommend her for a nomination either though. And similarly Snooki doesn't exactly inspire rational political discussion either.
Snooki draws crowds too, I wouldn't recommend her for a nomination either though. And similarly Snooki doesn't exactly inspire rational political discussion either.
Unfortuantly your statement (not even an arguement) might carry some weight to it if you had actually used someone worth talking about.
snooki is way below palin when it come to just about everything.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Actually the analogy works pretty well - considering how much misinformation the people that she energizes actually claim to believe. (Especially since Snooki's been involved in one political thing that she actually represented correctly, she's batting 1.000 compared to Palin who's batting around 0.250, and I'm being generous)
Remember, she's not really "TEA Party" material in the valid portion of the movement, she's almost entirely representative of the "TEA Party" that most people feel negatively towards for being ignorant and/or racist.
Drawing crowds really means little depending on the quality (especially intellectually speaking) of the people attracted - Steve Austin ("Stone Cold" not the other one - in case there's some confusion) I'm sure would draw a nice crowd for politicians if he opted to speak at a rally, but would he attract people that help you make your positions attractive to the moderates that really win elections? Likely not.
Angry incoherent mobs, which is large portion of what Palin attracts, are just as likely to motivate your own base as they are to motivate the opposing base.
Hell, look at most of the politicians that Palin stumped for this year and their results - she stumped for something like 13 politicians and all but 2 lost if memory serves. Republicans taking seats left and right - yet she was the kiss of death for most of those she "helped".
[And for the reverse part of the equation - many people consider the incoherence of the many anti-war protests to have helped motivate the base for W to get reelected in 2004]
Actually the analogy works pretty well - considering how much misinformation the people that she energizes actually claim to believe. (Especially since Snooki's been involved in one political thing that she actually represented correctly, she's batting 1.000 compared to Palin who's batting around 0.250, and I'm being generous)
this statement coming from you doesn't surprise me at all. tell me one thing other than being a pop hit for right now that snookie has actually accomplished. something meaningful.
Remember, she's not really "TEA Party" material in the valid portion of the movement, she's almost entirely representative of the "TEA Party" that most people feel negatively towards for being ignorant and/or racist.
the only people that think she is ignorant or racist are liberals who tow the party line on anything and everything. you know the same type of people that make the statements above.
Drawing crowds really means little depending on the quality
Really because the tea party people are made up of doctors and lawyers and other high professional people. you don't consider those people quality people? i kinda find that hard to believe.
Angry incoherent mobs, which is large portion of what Palin attracts, are just as likely to motivate your own base as they are to motivate the opposing base.
Really because well reality is different than what the huffington post and daily kos decide to publish. i didn't think you read that garbage but i guess i could be wrong.
Hell, look at most of the politicians that Palin stumped for this year and their results - she stumped for something like 13 politicians and all but 2 lost if memory serves. Republicans taking seats left and right - yet she was the kiss of death for most of those she "helped".
Really because that isn't true. palin stumped for 77 candadites and 49 of them won. I don't call that to shabby in a national race. i don't know where you are getting your numbers from though.
the only people that think she is ignorant or racist are liberals who tow the party line on anything and everything. you know the same type of people that make the statements above.
I was actually thinking more along the lines of "loud, obnoxious, over-the-top", just like I'd have labeled the anti-Iraq War protesters that I compared them to, but thanks for playing.
Really because the tea party people are made up of doctors and lawyers and other high professional people. you don't consider those people quality people? i kinda find that hard to believe.
There's different sections of the TEA Party movement - a grand majority of high end professionals with interest in the party support it even when it's not going to be a TV event with Palin at it. The little rinky-dink one here in Baltimore I mentioned back in the day was entirely gentlemen in suits with signs supporting the TEA Party movement coherently and actually seemed to be having civil discussions with folks that stopped to talk.
If every TEA Party rally was like Baltimore it wouldn't nearly have the media coverage it does, but damned if it wouldn't have the black eye that you keep crying about.
Compare that to a TEA Party rally that Palin is at and it starts looking more like the crowd you'd expect to see at a NASCAR event - with incoherent/biased signage, and a majority of discussions that occur quickly changing to yelling if you contradict even a single one of their political ideals.
Really because well reality is different than what the huffington post and daily kos decide to publish. i didn't think you read that garbage but i guess i could be wrong.
So they made up the Obama as a witch doctor sign, and other such signs that appeared at the rallies that she was active for? They fabricated the videos (and personal interaction I've had at the two I visited personally [remember in the case of the Balmer rally and the NoVa one I went past I was only driving past - NoVa looked pretty peaceful too though, much bigger than Balmer's though]) of people getting almost violent in their screaming and such when you try to have rational political two-way discussion with them on their ideas?
Sure, not EVERY rally was a cesspool, which seems to be the frequent representation on DailyKOS (Not as much so on Huffpo - but I'd imagine you never read Huffpo) - but plenty of them had a number of people acting out at them which there's no debate happened.
Really because that isn't true. palin stumped for 77 candadites and 49 of them won. I don't call that to shabby in a national race. i don't know where you are getting your numbers from though.
Psst - endorsing and "stumping" aren't the same thing - your link and quotes are about who she ENDORSED.
"Stumping" is showing up and actually speaking on behalf of the candidate endorsing them in person which she only did for 13 of the endorsements she gave - and for those it was the kiss of death. (Much like it was the kiss of death for the Senator in AZ she stumped for in the primaries - but that's a separate figure)
There is more to the US than maryland when are you going to learn this? hmmm
not anytime soon i guess. your loss.
Compare that to a TEA Party rally that Palin is at and it starts looking more like the crowd you'd expect to see at a NASCAR event - with incoherent/biased signage, and a majority of discussions that occur quickly changing to yelling if you contradict even a single one of their political ideals.
ol you mean the cherry picked photo ops that liberal blog sites decide to take while the other 99% of the people there don't have anything at all.
here i thought you more intelligent than to make this arguement.
So they made up the Obama as a witch doctor sign, and other such signs that appeared at the rallies that she was active for?
very few of them actually do this.
Sure, not EVERY rally was a cesspool, which seems to be the frequent representation on DailyKOS (Not as much so on Huffpo - but I'd imagine you never read Huffpo) - but plenty of them had a number of people acting out at them which there's no debate happened.
actually no i don't read any of them sinse well their credibility and pure motives as liberal spin machines are quite apparent. their credibility is about zilch.
Psst - endorsing and "stumping" aren't the same thing - your link and quotes are about who she ENDORSED.
"Stumping" is showing up and actually speaking on behalf of the candidate endorsing them in person which she only did for 13 of the endorsements she gave - and for those it was the kiss of death. (Much like it was the kiss of death for the Senator in AZ she stumped for in the primaries - but that's a separate figure)
psst read the link again. nice of you to skip it though. all the information is in the link she had far more than the so called 13 that you mention (needless to say without a source at all which is typical).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
There is more to the US than maryland when are you going to learn this? hmmm
not anytime soon i guess. your loss.
Do you even try to comprehend what people are saying? The small one here in Baltimore with roughly 15 in attendance was very respectable in both outward appearance and action - they are an example of what the TEA Party should strive for.
Why would you downplay my statement? They're the people you'd want more of, not less.
ol you mean the cherry picked photo ops that liberal blog sites decide to take while the other 99% of the people there don't have anything at all.
The Washington DC rally was swarmed with those types that I saw with my own eyes - in fact from the viewpoint that I had of the outer edges the "liberal cherry picked photos" actually tended to show fewer than it appeared from the outer edges of the rally.
Same goes for the Philly rally which I also went to in person - although I didn't see TV coverage of it to compare against.
very few of them actually do this.
If I'd taken photos when I visited the DC rally I would be able to show you pics that had 1-2 Obama witch doctors, 2-3 swastikas, and 4-5 hammer and sickles in a single picture the density was so high in parts of the crowd.
However, to be fair - Washington, DC was of course the best one to attend if you wanted to be an attention whore and show up on TV - and the best way to show up on TV was to do something ridiculous and over the top.
But attention whoring isn't exactly good politically and often does more harm than good when it comes to attracting people to your viewpoint by angering the opposition and pushing some of those on the fence away because they want to distance themselves..
And regardless the portion of them is relatively moot, frankly more would be better, because with the general perception of how many there are it creates a fervor in those opposed to that tomfoolery while motivating very few to follow them as a result of the tomfoolery - so at least more would help counterbalance the push from the opposition that they cause from their PERCEIVED NUMBERS.
[Even if you disagree about their actual numbers, you cannot deny that the PERCEPTION of many is that they're relatively numerous - perception is important in this case]
actually no i don't read any of them sinse well their credibility and pure motives as liberal spin machines are quite apparent. their credibility is about zilch.
You do realize that HuffPo doesn't actually produce much in the way of content, right? It's just a Drudge Report that cherrypicks from the other side of the tracks.
psst read the link again. nice of you to skip it though. all the information is in the link she had far more than the so called 13 that you mention (needless to say without a source at all which is typical).
Just because Sarah Palin wasn’t up for election last night doesn’t mean that she couldn’t win—or lose. As midterm results continue to pour in, Good Morning America took a moment to reflect upon how House, Senate, and gubernatorial candidates endorsed by Palin performed last night. So how did her Mama and Papa Grizzlies do? Pretty, pretty well. “If there was any doubt about it, last night’s election confirmed the strength of the Tea Party and of Sarah Palin as a national figure,” Robin Roberts informed her viewers. She tallied up how Palin’s picks fared: six of her eleven Senate endorsements won (and we’re still waiting for Alaskan results), as did twenty-one of her forty-one House endorsements (with many more races yet to be decided), and six of her eleven gubernatorial candidates will be taking office as well.
Looks like Karl Rove’s fears have come true: Palin wields considerable influence over the Republican Party and, in turn, much of the nation (including SPALASKA!). The only question now is whether it’ll carry over to 2012.
Please show me where it mentions who she stumped for of those 77 - and keep in mind with the length of the campaign season this year that it would be practically impossible for someone to stump for 77 people without some form of teleportation especially since those 77 people were spread amongst 34 states.
But sure, go on believing she stumped for 77 people in what was a campaign season of 90 days in most states.
I could spend a while trying to search up a link to prove the stumping numbers, but even just basic logic shows your concept of her 77 being all stumping is ridiculous. (Especially since usually a politician/ex-politician stumping for even 5 candidates is considered a lot, even moreso in an off-year election)
Do you even try to comprehend what people are saying? The small one here in Baltimore with roughly 15 in attendance was very respectable in both outward appearance and action - they are an example of what the TEA Party should strive for.
Why would you downplay my statement? They're the people you'd want more of, not less.
you don't listen so why are critizing other people? more so i am trying to tell you that there are plenty of people across the country that belong to the tea party that are the same way. yet you don't seem to get it. in fact the are in more numbers than you give them credit for. to you they are nothing but racists which you have yet to prove.
The Washington DC rally was swarmed with those types that I saw with my own eyes - in fact from the viewpoint that I had of the outer edges the "liberal cherry picked photos" actually tended to show fewer than it appeared from the outer edges of the rally.
Same goes for the Philly rally which I also went to in person - although I didn't see TV coverage of it to compare against.
seems that other sources disagree with the liberal spin media who are about as scared of the tea party as they are of sarah palin in general.
If I'd taken photos when I visited the DC rally I would be able to show you pics that had 1-2 Obama witch doctors, 2-3 swastikas, and 4-5 hammer and sickles in a single picture the density was so high in parts of the crowd.
is that all of the 10 of thousands of people there? like i said just a few fringe people and you eat it up like it is everyone.
You do realize that HuffPo doesn't actually produce much in the way of content, right? It's just a Drudge Report that cherrypicks from the other side of the tracks.
i don't read drudge either.
Please show me where it mentions who she stumped for of those 77 - and keep in mind with the length of the campaign season this year that it would be practically impossible for someone to stump for 77 people without some form of teleportation especially since those 77 people were spread amongst 34 states.
in a world where you can fly across the county in 5 hours yes it is possible. more so if you are only there for an hour at the most.
why would she not stump for the people that she endorsed.
I could spend a while trying to search up a link to prove the stumping numbers, but even just basic logic shows your concept of her 77 being all stumping is ridiculous.
prove it with something. you never back up anything you say anyway. so back it up. i guess all that flying that obama did for rallies across the entire US for all those people is just as illogical as you put it.
seeing how there are multiple candidate's in each state it would be very possible.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
You guys are both wrong. The TEA party is not a group of racist, socialist toting fools that are almost mob worthy. They are also largely made up of ignorant people wrapped up in a celebrity festival, where Sarah Palin takes center stage. Sadly, this is all America really cares about, their celebrities and God.
EDIT: Seriously though, all Sarah Palin is a celebrity, she has done an remarkable job selling her image, and has garnered a huge crowd because of it. Barack Obama did this too. It's integral to American politics now. It's sad, but true. There are racist people in the TEA party, there are also racist republicans, and democrats. It would probably nicely fit on a bell curve, 2% racist extremists in every group.
You guys are both wrong. The TEA party is not a group of racist, socialist toting fools that are almost mob worthy. They are also largely made up of ignorant people wrapped up in a celebrity festival, where Sarah Palin takes center stage. Sadly, this is all America really cares about, their celebrities and God.
you know when you do this you don't help your case at all. the tea party is made up of everyday average americans that care about what is going on in their country. they are everything from the working guy to the lawyer and doctor.
they are people of all colors and creeds. they have a very diverse section of the populace. don't be calling people ignorant when you don't know anything about them other than what the liberal media decides to spew.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
you know when you do this you don't help your case at all. the tea party is made up of everyday average americans that care about what is going on in their country. they are everything from the working guy to the lawyer and doctor.
they are people of all colors and creeds. they have a very diverse section of the populace. don't be calling people ignorant when you don't know anything about them other than what the liberal media decides to spew.
No, the average American is an ignorant person, and don't argue that they aren't. If the average American actually sat down, and spent some time actually learning about they are getting active in, or forming an opinion on something then this country would be a much smarter place. I think there would be more civility, and more maturity. Instead people just do what others do, they play the monkey see, monkey do game. I live in a VERY red area. Obama lost my district in 08, and we have nothing republican representatives. I talk amongst many different people, and the sheer amount of them that do not know what TARP even is, that the bush-tax cuts are not tax cuts for next year, but just a continuation of what we already have is astounding every time I talk.
The best part about my argument is that it's true without even having to apply it to this situation, because you know I'm right. You probably think the same of Liberals. I don't, I just don't like people who spout things from their mouth that don't make sense, or have clearly had no thought put behind them. Luckily there are very few people on this forum like this, and you're clearly not one of them. But the average American who is involved with politics, on both sides? Nope, their largely ignorant people who do want what's best for this country, but really don't know how to get there.
Notice, I'm not aiming this at the right, but at both sides. The TEA party is full of ignorant people, and it's exasperated as it's full of a lot of people who aren't typically involved with politics. I see this is a good thing and a bad thing. It's good people are getting involved, it's bad that they remain so ignorant, and choose to listen instead of research.
Anyways, I hastily typed this as I'm about to go to work, please pardon glaring grammar errors, and sentences that may not make much sense. Hopefully, I got my true point across.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"I've always been a fan of reality by popular vote" - Stephen Colbert (in response to Don McLeroy)
You guys are both wrong. The TEA party is not a group of racist, socialist toting fools that are almost mob worthy. They are also largely made up of ignorant people wrapped up in a celebrity festival, where Sarah Palin takes center stage. Sadly, this is all America really cares about, their celebrities and God.
To be fair, I never said they were racist or anything else - he's the one that attempted to fill in the blanks I left incorrectly. Your description is quite accurate for what I was trying to portray. [I have said that they were racist in the past - but as I've gotten to know more, including attempting to talk to some of the sign holders, I've changed my mind about them being overtly racist, but by far few can hold an informed political discussion]
Quote from mystery45 »
more so i am trying to tell you that there are plenty of people across the country that belong to the tea party that are the same way.
I didn't doubt that, I was stating there was explicitly some good, valid TEA Party rallies that I witnessed myself - yet you in your "attack everything" fervor attacked even that point.
Are you insane enough to think that it's a bad thing that I mentioned there was a positive TEA Party rally around here? Sure, it wasn't mammoth, but the point I was making in that point was that at least SOME PORTION WAS POSITIVE.
is that all of the 10 of thousands of people there? like i said just a few fringe people and you eat it up like it is everyone.
You'll note that I said in a SINGLE picture - they did tend to clump up, from just quick estimates on my memory I'd say for the portion of the field I could see there was probably 60-70 signs I could read and about 40-50 of them were of similar caliber to those - of course I could see probably 500 people that weren't carrying signs at all in that same field of view, a relatively small portion, maybe 10-20% were carrying signs at all, but of those signs from what I saw myself 70-80% fit the "over the top" examples that got shown in the media on loop.
And regardless of if they're fringe or not the point is the PERCEPTION THAT PEOPLE HAVE, and I keep saying to you - there's an impression of a substantial enough portion for people to have the PERCEPTION that they need to act against the momentum of the ignorant numbers, even if they're not substantial.
It doesn't matter if there's 5 or 5000 at the average rally, the political backlash from the other side of the coin is the same regardless of their numbers because of the perception THAT IS MY POINT not that there's many (or few) of them.
i guess all that flying that obama did for rallies across the entire US for all those people is just as illogical as you put it.
In the 2008 election he stumped for 21 candidates and that was over a main year election that had an election season of nearly 180 days (and that was considered insanely high - and if you divide things down by the shorter election season that factors out to about equivalent to 13-14) - this year he stumped for 8.
[And of course, lets not forget that the 77 tally is 57-61 in other places - and does include the PRIMARY SEASON, which I was not referring to]
Or to quote from an article: "The biggest buzzkill for the Palin stamp, however, is likely the failure of her name to count, or maybe even to hurt, in some key races that were both more risky for her to get involved in, as well as more important for the GOP to capture. Vital Senate races in California, Nevada, West Virginia and Delaware -- contests that the GOP hoped and believed they could win -- were also the areas of Palin's most outspoken activity, and seats that Republicans were unable to take."
That's more to the point than my discussion of stumping (direct involvement) anyhow.
Well folks, even though it was pressured I'm glad the cuts were extended
It hasn't passed yet. there are a ton of liberal dem's that are upset with this bill. even though it gives them things that they want. they are mad that those evil business owners will be getting at tax break.
they are also mad that those people that have already paid taxes on their estate for 60+ years and have to pay taxes again when they pass it on to their kids that they worked and saved their whole life for only have to pay 35% instead of 55%.
i was surprised at the payroll tax cut. that will help a ton even if it is 2% that is still a good bit of money.
more so to companies.
we will have to wait and see. it looks like the dem's are going to filibuster it.
some of the more conservatives are breaking but i think this is the best they are going to get.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Pretty sure they will. Obama's already getting into position to take it.
They might do it only because they don't have any other choice at this point in time and they are not going to go into next year where the average family will see a 2-3K raise in their taxes.
it just isn't going to happen. it would be political suicide.
the fact that neither side gets everything they want means it is a pretty good deal. i don't like some of it but mostly more unemployeement benefits and the price tag of the bill itself, but i don't see how they can get around not passing some kind of a tax cut.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around. Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
There was a freeze in rate adjustments from August 2008 to Jan 2010 while HCR was about to get worked on and in the works. (end half of FY08 to close to the end of FY09)
Did your company change policies or alter the terms of their policy? Because that was allowed, but you likely would be getting a better policy out of the hike as well. [For example if your company was proactively raising anything that was under the min coverage levels required a few years in the future - that was OK during the freeze]
And very little cost is being tossed onto the insurance companies this year outside of special pools (i.e. the high risk pool) - and since they have to keep pools explicitly separate, not one iota of the increased costs are going to touch existing pools - lest the insurance companies want to risk ridiculous fines if it's caught when their books are audited for compliance.
The part about cost increases is actually there in the CBO link above and explicitly goes over the places where cost will increase and why - and if you see anything over 10% your company is bucking the average by almost double since the average is at 5.5% for FY10. Please read the actual source materials more often and Boehner talking points less often.
Or to add another link that covers your nonsense more completely: http://factcheck.org/2010/11/the-truth-about-health-insurance-premiums/
[And of course an interesting note in that link is that many employers were running much higher than the maximum tax benefit contribution for health insurance, and many have scaled that back during the recession - the important thing is the TOTAL COST OF THE PLAN - if employers next year got a 150% deduction of their contribution to employee health care with no cap, they'd obviously all switch over to paying 100% for every employee, but the policies would still cost exactly the same regardless of how much the employer covered portion is]
Hopefully any more discussion of individual insurance policies will include the full data on the binder rather than just what the employee contribution is, because the latter is HIGHLY subject to employer manipulation. (especially in professional fields where higher than the tax benefit max contribution is a commonplace benefit used to attract employees - i.e. Google circa 2006 was actually paying 100% of their employee premiums amongst their professional staff - that's around a 400% hike if they decided to drop down to the max tax benefit tier of coverage! [IIRC it's 25% where tax benefit maxes generally - but been out of doing that paperwork for 4 years come April - so take that with a grain of salt])
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
She's become far too publicized, and tried to become that way, which has only made her lose political respect.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I disagree that it's impossible that she'd win if she ran - but if she did, it would be bad for the Republicans long term - both parties need to be moving back towards the center not the fringe. [Note that I'm of the opinion that VP choice can temper someone not too overboard if utilized well]
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
Rent is increasing because all these people that are defaulting on their house can afford to pay rent. so they are renting whatever they can get.
you have a flooded renters market right now. plus they won't qualify for a home loan again because they defaulted on their first one.
It depends on the area that you live in. that might be true in CA or NY but in FL no housing prices are actuall below what they should be. my house is almost worth what i owe on it. I looked into a refi and can't get one.
i think she will try. I think her show will only help her really. if not for the only reason to give people a deeper look at her personal life.
The media made her out to be stupid like many other things they said about her that isn't the case.
i agree she has a long way to go, but if she does it correct she could make a good attempt. depending on who is running she doesn't have my vote anyway.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I mean, I tried to like Palin after the McCain campaign's announcement, but no, she's a moron. She inspires no confidence in the American people, she only harmed the McCain campaign in the eyes of moderates, she's not someone the Republican party wants to have as a leading voice.
I agree that some moderates don't like her which is why she won't win the nomination, but she is very good at engerizing the base. what she is doing now is where she is suppose to be at and that is generating excitement and getting people out to the polls to vote.
you have to admit she generates huge crowds when she goes to speak somewhere.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
Unfortuantly your statement (not even an arguement) might carry some weight to it if you had actually used someone worth talking about.
snooki is way below palin when it come to just about everything.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Remember, she's not really "TEA Party" material in the valid portion of the movement, she's almost entirely representative of the "TEA Party" that most people feel negatively towards for being ignorant and/or racist.
Drawing crowds really means little depending on the quality (especially intellectually speaking) of the people attracted - Steve Austin ("Stone Cold" not the other one - in case there's some confusion) I'm sure would draw a nice crowd for politicians if he opted to speak at a rally, but would he attract people that help you make your positions attractive to the moderates that really win elections? Likely not.
Angry incoherent mobs, which is large portion of what Palin attracts, are just as likely to motivate your own base as they are to motivate the opposing base.
Hell, look at most of the politicians that Palin stumped for this year and their results - she stumped for something like 13 politicians and all but 2 lost if memory serves. Republicans taking seats left and right - yet she was the kiss of death for most of those she "helped".
[And for the reverse part of the equation - many people consider the incoherence of the many anti-war protests to have helped motivate the base for W to get reelected in 2004]
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
this statement coming from you doesn't surprise me at all. tell me one thing other than being a pop hit for right now that snookie has actually accomplished. something meaningful.
the only people that think she is ignorant or racist are liberals who tow the party line on anything and everything. you know the same type of people that make the statements above.
Really because the tea party people are made up of doctors and lawyers and other high professional people. you don't consider those people quality people? i kinda find that hard to believe.
Really because well reality is different than what the huffington post and daily kos decide to publish. i didn't think you read that garbage but i guess i could be wrong.
Really because that isn't true. palin stumped for 77 candadites and 49 of them won. I don't call that to shabby in a national race. i don't know where you are getting your numbers from though.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/palins-picks-good-morning-america-tallies-up-how-sarah-palin/
has an even better break down.
6 of 11 senate and 21 of her 41 house members. that doesn't include others that she stumped for in other states.
6 of her 11 gov canadites won as well.
she is batting about 50% across the board that is not bad in a national election.
if fact it is pretty good.
so again i don't know where you are getting your information from like always but i would think about getting a different source.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
I was actually thinking more along the lines of "loud, obnoxious, over-the-top", just like I'd have labeled the anti-Iraq War protesters that I compared them to, but thanks for playing.
There's different sections of the TEA Party movement - a grand majority of high end professionals with interest in the party support it even when it's not going to be a TV event with Palin at it. The little rinky-dink one here in Baltimore I mentioned back in the day was entirely gentlemen in suits with signs supporting the TEA Party movement coherently and actually seemed to be having civil discussions with folks that stopped to talk.
If every TEA Party rally was like Baltimore it wouldn't nearly have the media coverage it does, but damned if it wouldn't have the black eye that you keep crying about.
Compare that to a TEA Party rally that Palin is at and it starts looking more like the crowd you'd expect to see at a NASCAR event - with incoherent/biased signage, and a majority of discussions that occur quickly changing to yelling if you contradict even a single one of their political ideals.
So they made up the Obama as a witch doctor sign, and other such signs that appeared at the rallies that she was active for? They fabricated the videos (and personal interaction I've had at the two I visited personally [remember in the case of the Balmer rally and the NoVa one I went past I was only driving past - NoVa looked pretty peaceful too though, much bigger than Balmer's though]) of people getting almost violent in their screaming and such when you try to have rational political two-way discussion with them on their ideas?
Sure, not EVERY rally was a cesspool, which seems to be the frequent representation on DailyKOS (Not as much so on Huffpo - but I'd imagine you never read Huffpo) - but plenty of them had a number of people acting out at them which there's no debate happened.
Psst - endorsing and "stumping" aren't the same thing - your link and quotes are about who she ENDORSED.
"Stumping" is showing up and actually speaking on behalf of the candidate endorsing them in person which she only did for 13 of the endorsements she gave - and for those it was the kiss of death. (Much like it was the kiss of death for the Senator in AZ she stumped for in the primaries - but that's a separate figure)
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
There is more to the US than maryland when are you going to learn this? hmmm
not anytime soon i guess. your loss.
ol you mean the cherry picked photo ops that liberal blog sites decide to take while the other 99% of the people there don't have anything at all.
here i thought you more intelligent than to make this arguement.
very few of them actually do this.
actually no i don't read any of them sinse well their credibility and pure motives as liberal spin machines are quite apparent. their credibility is about zilch.
psst read the link again. nice of you to skip it though. all the information is in the link she had far more than the so called 13 that you mention (needless to say without a source at all which is typical).
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Do you even try to comprehend what people are saying? The small one here in Baltimore with roughly 15 in attendance was very respectable in both outward appearance and action - they are an example of what the TEA Party should strive for.
Why would you downplay my statement? They're the people you'd want more of, not less.
The Washington DC rally was swarmed with those types that I saw with my own eyes - in fact from the viewpoint that I had of the outer edges the "liberal cherry picked photos" actually tended to show fewer than it appeared from the outer edges of the rally.
Same goes for the Philly rally which I also went to in person - although I didn't see TV coverage of it to compare against.
If I'd taken photos when I visited the DC rally I would be able to show you pics that had 1-2 Obama witch doctors, 2-3 swastikas, and 4-5 hammer and sickles in a single picture the density was so high in parts of the crowd.
However, to be fair - Washington, DC was of course the best one to attend if you wanted to be an attention whore and show up on TV - and the best way to show up on TV was to do something ridiculous and over the top.
But attention whoring isn't exactly good politically and often does more harm than good when it comes to attracting people to your viewpoint by angering the opposition and pushing some of those on the fence away because they want to distance themselves..
And regardless the portion of them is relatively moot, frankly more would be better, because with the general perception of how many there are it creates a fervor in those opposed to that tomfoolery while motivating very few to follow them as a result of the tomfoolery - so at least more would help counterbalance the push from the opposition that they cause from their PERCEIVED NUMBERS.
[Even if you disagree about their actual numbers, you cannot deny that the PERCEPTION of many is that they're relatively numerous - perception is important in this case]
You do realize that HuffPo doesn't actually produce much in the way of content, right? It's just a Drudge Report that cherrypicks from the other side of the tracks.
Here's a c/p of the entire link you provided:
From [U]http://www.mediaite.com/tv/palins-picks-good-morning-america-tallies-up-how-sarah-palin/
Please show me where it mentions who she stumped for of those 77 - and keep in mind with the length of the campaign season this year that it would be practically impossible for someone to stump for 77 people without some form of teleportation especially since those 77 people were spread amongst 34 states.
But sure, go on believing she stumped for 77 people in what was a campaign season of 90 days in most states.
I could spend a while trying to search up a link to prove the stumping numbers, but even just basic logic shows your concept of her 77 being all stumping is ridiculous. (Especially since usually a politician/ex-politician stumping for even 5 candidates is considered a lot, even moreso in an off-year election)
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
you don't listen so why are critizing other people? more so i am trying to tell you that there are plenty of people across the country that belong to the tea party that are the same way. yet you don't seem to get it. in fact the are in more numbers than you give them credit for. to you they are nothing but racists which you have yet to prove.
seems that other sources disagree with the liberal spin media who are about as scared of the tea party as they are of sarah palin in general.
is that all of the 10 of thousands of people there? like i said just a few fringe people and you eat it up like it is everyone.
i don't read drudge either.
in a world where you can fly across the county in 5 hours yes it is possible. more so if you are only there for an hour at the most.
why would she not stump for the people that she endorsed.
prove it with something. you never back up anything you say anyway. so back it up. i guess all that flying that obama did for rallies across the entire US for all those people is just as illogical as you put it.
seeing how there are multiple candidate's in each state it would be very possible.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
EDIT: Seriously though, all Sarah Palin is a celebrity, she has done an remarkable job selling her image, and has garnered a huge crowd because of it. Barack Obama did this too. It's integral to American politics now. It's sad, but true. There are racist people in the TEA party, there are also racist republicans, and democrats. It would probably nicely fit on a bell curve, 2% racist extremists in every group.
"I've always been a fan of reality by popular vote" - Stephen Colbert (in response to Don McLeroy)
GPolukranos, Kill ALL the Things!G
you know when you do this you don't help your case at all. the tea party is made up of everyday average americans that care about what is going on in their country. they are everything from the working guy to the lawyer and doctor.
they are people of all colors and creeds. they have a very diverse section of the populace. don't be calling people ignorant when you don't know anything about them other than what the liberal media decides to spew.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
No, the average American is an ignorant person, and don't argue that they aren't. If the average American actually sat down, and spent some time actually learning about they are getting active in, or forming an opinion on something then this country would be a much smarter place. I think there would be more civility, and more maturity. Instead people just do what others do, they play the monkey see, monkey do game. I live in a VERY red area. Obama lost my district in 08, and we have nothing republican representatives. I talk amongst many different people, and the sheer amount of them that do not know what TARP even is, that the bush-tax cuts are not tax cuts for next year, but just a continuation of what we already have is astounding every time I talk.
The best part about my argument is that it's true without even having to apply it to this situation, because you know I'm right. You probably think the same of Liberals. I don't, I just don't like people who spout things from their mouth that don't make sense, or have clearly had no thought put behind them. Luckily there are very few people on this forum like this, and you're clearly not one of them. But the average American who is involved with politics, on both sides? Nope, their largely ignorant people who do want what's best for this country, but really don't know how to get there.
Notice, I'm not aiming this at the right, but at both sides. The TEA party is full of ignorant people, and it's exasperated as it's full of a lot of people who aren't typically involved with politics. I see this is a good thing and a bad thing. It's good people are getting involved, it's bad that they remain so ignorant, and choose to listen instead of research.
Anyways, I hastily typed this as I'm about to go to work, please pardon glaring grammar errors, and sentences that may not make much sense. Hopefully, I got my true point across.
"I've always been a fan of reality by popular vote" - Stephen Colbert (in response to Don McLeroy)
GPolukranos, Kill ALL the Things!G
To be fair, I never said they were racist or anything else - he's the one that attempted to fill in the blanks I left incorrectly. Your description is quite accurate for what I was trying to portray. [I have said that they were racist in the past - but as I've gotten to know more, including attempting to talk to some of the sign holders, I've changed my mind about them being overtly racist, but by far few can hold an informed political discussion]
I didn't doubt that, I was stating there was explicitly some good, valid TEA Party rallies that I witnessed myself - yet you in your "attack everything" fervor attacked even that point.
Are you insane enough to think that it's a bad thing that I mentioned there was a positive TEA Party rally around here? Sure, it wasn't mammoth, but the point I was making in that point was that at least SOME PORTION WAS POSITIVE.
You'll note that I said in a SINGLE picture - they did tend to clump up, from just quick estimates on my memory I'd say for the portion of the field I could see there was probably 60-70 signs I could read and about 40-50 of them were of similar caliber to those - of course I could see probably 500 people that weren't carrying signs at all in that same field of view, a relatively small portion, maybe 10-20% were carrying signs at all, but of those signs from what I saw myself 70-80% fit the "over the top" examples that got shown in the media on loop.
And regardless of if they're fringe or not the point is the PERCEPTION THAT PEOPLE HAVE, and I keep saying to you - there's an impression of a substantial enough portion for people to have the PERCEPTION that they need to act against the momentum of the ignorant numbers, even if they're not substantial.
It doesn't matter if there's 5 or 5000 at the average rally, the political backlash from the other side of the coin is the same regardless of their numbers because of the perception THAT IS MY POINT not that there's many (or few) of them.
In the 2008 election he stumped for 21 candidates and that was over a main year election that had an election season of nearly 180 days (and that was considered insanely high - and if you divide things down by the shorter election season that factors out to about equivalent to 13-14) - this year he stumped for 8.
[And of course, lets not forget that the 77 tally is 57-61 in other places - and does include the PRIMARY SEASON, which I was not referring to]
Or to quote from an article: "The biggest buzzkill for the Palin stamp, however, is likely the failure of her name to count, or maybe even to hurt, in some key races that were both more risky for her to get involved in, as well as more important for the GOP to capture. Vital Senate races in California, Nevada, West Virginia and Delaware -- contests that the GOP hoped and believed they could win -- were also the areas of Palin's most outspoken activity, and seats that Republicans were unable to take."
That's more to the point than my discussion of stumping (direct involvement) anyhow.
Re: People misusing the term Vanilla to describe a flying, unleash (sometimes trample) critter.
Well folks, even though it was pressured I'm glad the cuts were extended.
My uncle was willed some land with mineral rights by an old cowboy. Not that he needed more land mind you, he's a farmer.
Just with this land, he invested and hit oil. Pretty damn cool considering I live on and maintain a small portion of it.
Dig it?
It hasn't passed yet. there are a ton of liberal dem's that are upset with this bill. even though it gives them things that they want. they are mad that those evil business owners will be getting at tax break.
they are also mad that those people that have already paid taxes on their estate for 60+ years and have to pay taxes again when they pass it on to their kids that they worked and saved their whole life for only have to pay 35% instead of 55%.
i was surprised at the payroll tax cut. that will help a ton even if it is 2% that is still a good bit of money.
more so to companies.
we will have to wait and see. it looks like the dem's are going to filibuster it.
some of the more conservatives are breaking but i think this is the best they are going to get.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
They might do it only because they don't have any other choice at this point in time and they are not going to go into next year where the average family will see a 2-3K raise in their taxes.
it just isn't going to happen. it would be political suicide.
the fact that neither side gets everything they want means it is a pretty good deal. i don't like some of it but mostly more unemployeement benefits and the price tag of the bill itself, but i don't see how they can get around not passing some kind of a tax cut.
Thanks to Epic Graphics the best around.
Thanks to Nex3 for the avatar visit ye old sig and avatar forum
Even though O made it clear he wasn't happy with things - See yesterdays press conf with him? wicked!
He did make it clear he was willing to work and compromise.
Hate to say it but, this may be the best play the dem's have made lately.