Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopilot
20 Ways ObamaCare Will Take Away Our Freedoms
Below is an article from an Investor's Buisness Daily blog. The author highlights (with a bit of sarcasm) just a few of the many bait-and-switch "features" buried throughout the new health care law. I don't necessarily agree with each conclusion, but generally agree with the overall sentiment.
For some reason the article has been unavailable today, but I was able to grab it from a cashed Google page. The original link is listed at the bottom of this post.
Enjoy!
|
The text of the bill is online. Why people can't check these things before passing them on is amazing to me.
1- Says nothing about small business. It is just a clever way to spin the basic fact that there is a mandate. Yes, there is a mandate and the fine will eventually scale up to $750. Of course, people must dress that up with the "killing small business" thing for some reason.
2- Section 2701 says nothing of that. It is a section prohibiting discriminatory premium rates for small or individual coverage. And in fact it allows for "discriminatory" premium rates for smokers.
3- Is just spin of a well known feature of the legislation
4- Section 2712 says nothing of the sort. It is actually the section that prohibits recissions
5- Section 2714 says nothing about employers being mandated to cover children up to 26 years of age. It says that dependents can stay on a plan until 26 years of age, but nothing on who must pay for the dependent's insurance.
6- Nowhere it says that everyone must be covered for all those things. It just defines those as "essential health benefits."
7- goes back to the mandate. I mean, if the mandate didn't have a minimum coverage, what would be the point?
8- Same as above, and again nothing about small businesses there.
9- Misleading at best. Employers will only be fined for each full time employee that enrolls in the subsidized health exchange programs. This is merely a provision to discourage employers from dumping their coverage so employees get on the subsidized plan.
10- That section doesn't say that. It just says that employer contributions will not be treated as qualified benefits for tax purposes if the employee contributes more than 2,500 of his own money towards that.
I could go on, but the 20 points are simply spin related to the two unpopular features of the plan: there are mandates, and certain specific taxes will go up.
---------- Post added at 12:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414
Well we wouldn't want you to be incoherent so I will explain it to you. See, Otto listed 20 items you might not like about the bill. The 20th item said, "5% charge on cosmetic surgery (Section 9017)."
I added "Section 9017-a Except Nancy Pelosi". The reason that is funny is because the woman has more surgery than Micheal Jackson and would go broke having to pay such a fee.
So, I have let you in to our little private language which flowed absolutely perfectly if one read the posts. I do apologize for you not getting the joke, though.
P.S. The "Well we wouldn't want you to be incoherent" is another joke and a play on words. The reason others will find that funny is because the most incoherent poster in this forum is accusing others of being incoherent. That's not even Alanis Morissette Ironic - that's "real" ironic. Don'tcha think?
|
I get it, it wasn't enough that all the other threads were derailed by rants, falsehoods, and generic spin. Maybe robot parade needs to start yet another thread, and then instead of saying "Please, please, stick to facts about the actual bill...not the process, not conspiracy theories...the bill." he could say "Please, please, PLEASE stick to facts about the actual bill...not the process, not conspiracy theories...the bill."