|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 9, 2013 9:56:34 GMT
I have heard (now mind you, nobody knows what or how this monster is going to work) that they (IRS) can only automatically take out the penalty IF you are owed a refund. Again, no sure about that and I forgot where I heard it. Something to follow up on, maybe? If they expect a check, well, I dunno. I would take it as far as possible before wage garnishments, collections, etc...get involved. Who knows, maybe if enough folks are in that situation and make their voices heard it will make this constitution trespass politically untenable for the elites who rule over us. Funny thing, my joke of lousy VA care qualifies as bare-minimum coverage. Lucky me? This is similar to what I've heard. If the IRS owes you a refund, then they can deduct the penalty. If you have to pay in or receive no refund, the IRS can't collect the fine. If this is truly the case(I'll see if I can find the source), then I think we'll see people playing with their withholding a lot more in order to receive no refund, as the "fine" goes up each year. FY 2014 is I think $96 or 2% AGI. FY 2015 it goes up to over $100, etc. etc. Doesn't matter. Sadly, we'll all be on single payer system by the time Hillary Clinton is in office. Stay in the gym, eat as healthy as you can, consume a ton of vitamins, and don't go skydiving. |
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 9, 2013 10:05:43 GMT
I was listening to the radio and the local station was interviewing a doctor that worked with Ron Paul. He said in Canada they will not issue licenses to doctors unless they see people in the public medical system. In the US there is no such binding obligation placed on doctors however, this guy seemed to think that Obamacare has some verbiage stating that if the doctor wants to keep there license they must participate in the Obamacare system. In a sense, they are creating positive rights by compelling doctors into a system they may not want to be a part of. I think legislation will be passed requiring doctors to accept those on an ACA plan once they see how many doctors leave because of this abomination. A VA Democrat has already brought it up . |
|
|
|
Post by nxp on Nov 9, 2013 18:19:33 GMT
I was listening to the radio and the local station was interviewing a doctor that worked with Ron Paul. He said in Canada they will not issue licenses to doctors unless they see people in the public medical system. In the US there is no such binding obligation placed on doctors however, this guy seemed to think that Obamacare has some verbiage stating that if the doctor wants to keep there license they must participate in the Obamacare system. In a sense, they are creating positive rights by compelling doctors into a system they may not want to be a part of. I think legislation will be passed requiring doctors to accept those on an ACA plan once they see how many doctors leave because of this abomination. A VA Democrat has already brought it up . I find this interesting - should this come to fruition, I'd be curious to see how the health care field reacts. We already have distanced ourselves so far from the traditional doctor/nurse setup, allowing for multiple providers and varying charges based on what level of provider actually does the service (eg, a PA, LPN, etc) that I can see doctors becoming even less involved in the actual day to day health care needs as insurance could dictate what it would pay for (ala Medicare), and force hospitals to change what providers do what services. Health care will become even more convoluted as a direction response to mandated insurance regulation. |
|
|
|
Post by rickoshea on Nov 10, 2013 5:19:43 GMT
Well, Wal-Daddy's is supposed to have all those Nurse Practitioners in all the stores eventually.....  |
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 11, 2013 18:37:07 GMT
In line with what Rick said, I think we'll see more cash in exchange for medical treatment places pop up due to Obamacare. That is, until .gov regulates all those out of business too. I could envision going to Walmart, picking up 9mm ammo, protein powder, etc. and thinking, "Oh yea, I haven't had my physical, etc. this year (basic care, etc.). Let me stop before I check out and see how long the wait is."
|
|
|
|
Post by nxp on Nov 12, 2013 2:52:48 GMT
There's a few things I'd consider getting from Wallyworld (I will admit to avoiding that store like the plague unless it's a requirement from the Mrs. I'd sooner spend my money at the Farm store across town...), but a "turn your head and cough" is NOT on the list of things I'd want from the same place where they'll take back used, open packaged, mix manufacturer batteries.
"I didn't need 'em, I wanna return 'em!"
NXP
|
|
|
|
Post by omegaman on Nov 12, 2013 15:11:02 GMT
Funny email from my father-in-law, highlights the abject stupidity of this unconstitutional B.S. :
Affordable Boat Act
The U.S. government has just passed a new law called: "The affordable boat act" declaring that every citizen MUST purchase a new boat, by April 2014. These "affordable" boats will cost an average of $54,000-$155,000 each. This does not include taxes, trailers, towing fees, licensing and registration fees, fuel, docking and storage fees, maintenance or repair costs.
This law has been passed, because until now, typically only wealthy and financially responsible people have been able to purchase boats. This new laws ensures that every American can now have a "affordable" boat of their own, because everyone is "entitled" to a new boat. If you purchase your boat before the end of the year, you will receive 4 "free" life jackets; not including monthly usage fees.
In order to make sure everyone purchases an affordable boat, the costs of owning a boat will increase on average of 250-400% per year. This way, wealthy people will pay more for something that other people don't want or can't afford to maintain. But to be fair, people who cant afford to maintain their boat will be regularly fined and children (under the age of 26) can use their parents boats to party on until they turn 27; then must purchase their own boat.
If you already have a boat, you can keep yours (just kidding; no you can't). If you don't want or don't need a boat, you are required to buy one anyhow. If you refuse to buy one or cant afford one, you will be regularly fined $800 until you purchase one or face imprisonment.
Failure to use the boat will also result in fines. People living in the desert; ghettos; inner cities or areas with no access to lakes are not exempt. Age, motion sickness, experience, knowledge nor lack of desire are not acceptable excuses for not using your boat.
A government review board (that doesn't know the difference between the port, starboard or stern of a boat) will decide everything, including; when, where, how often and for what purposes you can use your boat along with how many people can ride your boat and determine if one is too old or healthy enough to be able to use their boat. They will also decide if your boat has out lived its usefulness or if you must purchase specific accessories,(like a $500 compass) or a newer and more expensive boat.
Those that can afford yachts will be required to do so...its only fair. The government will also decide the name for each boat. Failure to comply with these rules will result in fines and possible imprisonment.
Government officials are exempt from this new law. If they want a boat, they and their families can obtain boats free, at the expense of tax payers. Unions, bankers and mega companies with large political affiliations (i.e., $$$) are also exempt.
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 12, 2013 15:28:50 GMT
Sadly, that's kind of accurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by nxp on Nov 12, 2013 16:49:14 GMT
OM - Yeah, I saw that on a fishing forum I'm part of. I chuckled and grimaced.
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 13, 2013 12:34:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 13, 2013 18:27:24 GMT
Funny email from my father-in-law, highlights the abject stupidity of this unconstitutional B.S. : Affordable Boat Act The U.S. government has just passed a new law called: "The affordable boat act" declaring that every citizen MUST purchase a new boat, by April 2014. These "affordable" boats will cost an average of $54,000-$155,000 each. This does not include taxes, trailers, towing fees, licensing and registration fees, fuel, docking and storage fees, maintenance or repair costs. This law has been passed, because until now, typically only wealthy and financially responsible people have been able to purchase boats. This new laws ensures that every American can now have a "affordable" boat of their own, because everyone is "entitled" to a new boat. If you purchase your boat before the end of the year, you will receive 4 "free" life jackets; not including monthly usage fees. In order to make sure everyone purchases an affordable boat, the costs of owning a boat will increase on average of 250-400% per year. This way, wealthy people will pay more for something that other people don't want or can't afford to maintain. But to be fair, people who cant afford to maintain their boat will be regularly fined and children (under the age of 26) can use their parents boats to party on until they turn 27; then must purchase their own boat. If you already have a boat, you can keep yours (just kidding; no you can't). If you don't want or don't need a boat, you are required to buy one anyhow. If you refuse to buy one or cant afford one, you will be regularly fined $800 until you purchase one or face imprisonment. Failure to use the boat will also result in fines. People living in the desert; ghettos; inner cities or areas with no access to lakes are not exempt. Age, motion sickness, experience, knowledge nor lack of desire are not acceptable excuses for not using your boat. A government review board (that doesn't know the difference between the port, starboard or stern of a boat) will decide everything, including; when, where, how often and for what purposes you can use your boat along with how many people can ride your boat and determine if one is too old or healthy enough to be able to use their boat. They will also decide if your boat has out lived its usefulness or if you must purchase specific accessories,(like a $500 compass) or a newer and more expensive boat. Those that can afford yachts will be required to do so...its only fair. The government will also decide the name for each boat. Failure to comply with these rules will result in fines and possible imprisonment. Government officials are exempt from this new law. If they want a boat, they and their families can obtain boats free, at the expense of tax payers. Unions, bankers and mega companies with large political affiliations (i.e., $$$) are also exempt. I lawled. And cried, kinda.  We haven't even gotten to employer sponsored plans yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Gingerbread Man on Nov 14, 2013 12:08:45 GMT
I love the "New Speak" being bantered by the media defending Obama on ACA. It really is Orwellian how they're re-re-writing and re-re-forming the language Obama used to sell this to the American people. "Incorrect promise" is by far my favorite. “He didn’t know the truth when he made the promises” really? And the extremely stong paternalistic “We must make the decision for them.”  It's not just me who's noticed either. townhall.com/columnists/bobbarr/2013/11/06/test-n1738687In George Orwell’s dystopian novel, “1984,” which describes life in an oppressive, virtually inescapable Surveillance State, the vocabulary of the populace is so tightly controlled and manipulated by the central government, it becomes a language unto its own: Newspeak. The purpose of Newspeak is to limit individual thought and provide the government virtually complete control over how citizens communicate. This, in turn, allows government agents to engineer whatever reality best serves the interests of the State. As a result, “truth” is whatever government wants it to be at a particular time and under specific circumstances; and the vast majority of citizens, happy in their status as cogs of the State, are none the wiser. Many Americans like to think our “enlightened” society would never fall for such obvious trickery; unfortunately, they’d be wrong. The Obama Administration routinely employs its own campaign of Newspeak to facilitate the implementation of a deeply authoritarian political agenda designed to reduce individual liberty, while simultaneously making citizens more reliant on the State. Obama has turned the White House into a veritable Ministry of Truth, creating any reality he wishes by manipulating the Mainstream Media through intimidation, misdirection and outright lies. “This is the most closed, control-freak administration I’ve ever covered,” New York Times Washington correspondent David Sanger told the Washington Post in a report on the state of journalism under Obama. Sanger and other members of the national press aptly note that the Administration is creating a toxic environment for reporters – at least for those who maintain roots in old-school journalistic ethics. Regular polygraph tests of government employees intimidate whistleblowers from “leaking” information that might be harmful to the Administration’s agenda. The Administration also strictly limits press access, using super-exclusive, “off the record” briefings, and relies on “staged” photo ops to create the best public image possible. This “control-freak” culture of Obama’s Ministry of Truth has been on full display following the launch of ObamaCare. When asked about initial enrollment numbers, Administration officials claimed such data was currently unavailable -- logically absurd in this day of instant online metrics and Big Data. Yet, by refusing to release any information to the media, officials were able to craft their own, customized narrative of ObamaCare “success,” without having to objectively prove the statements they made. When that “truth” was no longer viable, as the true devastation of ObamaCare began to be felt by millions citizens across the country who received insurance policy cancellation notices, the Administration flipped the script again. Suddenly Obama’s (repeated) promise of, ‘If you like your plan, you can keep your plan,’ became a media misinterpretation of what Obama really meant, and the rash of cancellations was simply “transitioning” people into “better” insurance policies. In this contorted universe, ObamaCare was working as expected, and the truth was exactly as Obama stated. Up is down, left is right, and bad is good. Did it matter that Obama knew for years that people would lose individual insurance coverage, and that he intentionally lied to the public so he could pass ObamaCare before being re-elected to office? Of course not, since that would be inconvenient for the President; so those facts were sent straight down the memory hole. Obama and his apologists simply blamed citizens for failing to understand the complexities of the new healthcare laws, and “bad apple” insurance companies for not being team players. Those who dare speak out against such manufactured realities face a culture of mockery and intimidation that permeates every level of government. For example, Ruben Santiago, interim police chief for the City of Columbia, South Carolina, recently took to the department’s Facebook page to threaten a commenter with police action for doing nothing more than questioning his department’s focus on marijuana-related offenses. The message thus delivered was crystal clear -- question law enforcement at your own risk -- even after Santiago stated later that his comment was misunderstood (sound familiar?). This 21st Century version of Orwell’s alternate language has found its way onto Capitol Hill; and appears to be a bi-partisan force. For example, former FBI Special Agent and current U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, recently mocked privacy watchdogs during a hearing on NSA surveillance. Rogers declared that privacy rights “can't be violated if people are not aware their privacy is being violated.” Such a facially absurd comment encapsulates the mentality of Big Government advocates like Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi and Obama himself – public officials all -- who regularly rely on blatantly illogical arguments to justify the paranoid reality they are engineering. In order for a democracy to function, citizen voters must be informed and educated about key public policy issues. This requires that the government provide full and accurate information -- free from political manipulation. If government is intentionally misleading the people, then the people no longer have control of their elected officials and become pawns in their political scheming. If there was ever paradigm for how the citizens of Orwell’s “1984” could be so systematically mislead by their government -- sometimes even contradicting itself one day to the next – it is this Administration. Employing the tools of the digital age, the federal government and those who administer it, have been able to take Orwell’s fictional “Newspeak” to a very real and frightening level. |
|
|
|
Post by Ten Eight on Nov 16, 2013 0:42:19 GMT
What blows my mind is the constant BLATANT lying. Look at Pelosi. She pulled enrollment numbers out of her washboard arse. Those numbers weren't even the true enrollment numbers. They included people who hadn't paid for their plan; those who only had added the plan to their cart.
100k (including state) enrollments - 5 million losing insurance. Fail.
I'll say it again. We haven't even gotten to the employer mandate yet, and all those cancellations.
I love to see the Dims infighting. It's hard to tell though what is 2014 election CYA speak, and what is genuine about face talk from their previous position.
|
|
|
|
Post by nxp on Nov 18, 2013 4:43:11 GMT
The Mob is fickle. It's amazing what a trinket will buy you when gifted at the correct moment.
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Nov 19, 2013 14:59:47 GMT
weaselzippers.us/2013/11/18/search-hints-on-healthcare-gov-show-a-lot-of-people-are-trying-to-hack-the-site/It seems someone is trying to use the search bar as a embedded SQL into the database. Unless the website intentionally stops this kind of attack, it will run the query. It's called "SQL Injection" and is an easy form of attack that a 10 year old could run. But it's results can be devastating. For those who don't speak SQL.... Line: 1) Show all data for all users. 2) Show all the database tables on the system. . . 7) Show me everything on the system. The most F'd up part of this is they are saving it as a search result!!!
|
|
