why is it that corporations trust obama to look out for them but we can't trust him to lift a finger?

oh yea, and *wtf ???!!!

not sure why this is in *lies. Also, without knowing the context of the question or comment that was made before his rebuttal, the only thing I see from this clip is that they were both for universal health care, and how obama and clinton want to go about it is different. Other than that, I dont see the point of this video.

I think the point is that we have just passed a bill that will impose penalties on people who do not purchase health care. Under Obama.

Personally I think the entire idea is ridiculous, but the bill as passed (from what I've been told) will not apply those penalties to families earning less than $88,000 per year. And even then, the penalties are fairly minor, something like $99 a year. There is also nothing in the bill defining how the government will determine whether or not you have purchased health care. So the mandate is one of the weakest parts of the bill.

Everybody has to have it. However there really isn't any great incentive to get it. So we're about to see one of the greatest incidences of mass civil disobedience the world has ever seen. It's a good thing.

What fools voted or this man. You had to drink the Kool-Aid. Well it just about time to bend over and let Obama FIST you and pull out wallet, take all you money, and leave you curled up on the floor screaming Why did I do this? Why did I vote for this? My tuckus hurts.

@bobknight33:

"My tuckus hurts."

And you have the gall to ask us why?

That alone is worth at least one vote.

What the hell was going on in your mind from 2001 to 2009?

Where was your outrage?

A couple points.

Obama was against the individual mandate for the reasons he said here -- he doesn't see why you should fine or go after people who can't afford insurance.

So, the bill he signed into law has an exemption from the fine for people who can't afford insurance, though subsidies make it pretty much impossible for insurance to be unaffordable to the poor.

Why did Obama flip-flop on the mandate? Because it's good policy. Ezra Klein explains pretty much everything you need to know about the individual mandate here, namely what it is, how it works, and why it's a necessary part of reform.

The short version: The way health insurance works (whether it's for-profit or not) is if you have a large pool of healthy people paying into the system to fund the medical costs for the few people who do get sick. If you make insurance companies accept people with preexisting conditions without a mandate, then people will be free to game the system and sign up for insurance only when they get sick. If there are no healthy people paying into the pool, then the premiums will be so high that paying out of pocket might be cheaper.

Sorry, I'm overthinking it. Obama's position on a specific implementation detail on health care is different now than it was two or three years ago. Clearly we should impeach him for being a big fat liar and a traitor to the American people.

Time to water the tree of liberty with the blood of people who change their minds in response to persuasive arguments from experts...

I agreed with Obama in not mandating insurance. I didn't think it should be done then and don't think it should be done now. Forcing people to buy these policies is a remarkable intrusion of government into our lives. Some random thoughts:



1. Regarding gaming the system: The fine is so minimal that I'll wait to get sick anyway. Nothing is going to change. There isn't a hospital in the land that is going to refuse me treatment today and there won't be a hospital that will refuse me treatment in five years.

2. Due to the coming financial impact on the bottom line, some pretty big name businesses are gearing up to shrink their employee roster. So much for creating jobs.

3. Your link is broken.

4. I just became Amish.>> ^NetRunner:

A couple points.
Obama was against the individual mandate for the reasons he said here -- he doesn't see why you should fine or go after people who can't afford insurance.
So, the bill he signed into law has an exemption from the fine for people who can't afford insurance, though subsidies make it pretty much impossible for insurance to be unaffordable to the poor.
Why did Obama flip-flop on the mandate? Because it's good policy. Ezra Klein explains pretty much everything you need to know about the individual mandate here, namely what it is, how it works, and why it's a necessary part of reform.
The short version: The way health insurance works (whether it's for-profit or not) is if you have a large pool of healthy people paying into the system to fund the medical costs for the few people who do get sick. If you make insurance companies accept people with preexisting conditions without a mandate, then people will be free to game the system and sign up for insurance only when they get sick. If there are no healthy people paying into the pool, then the premiums will be so high that paying out of pocket might be cheaper.
Sorry, I'm overthinking it. Obama's position on a specific implementation detail on health care is different now than it was two or three years ago. Clearly we should impeach him for being a big fat liar and a traitor to the American people.
Time to water the tree of liberty with the blood of people who change their minds in response to persuasive arguments from experts...

I'm actually glad to hear the penalty is not for poor families. but that's the first i've heard of it, and remember the bill hasn't passed the senate yet as of today.

all we have now is the old senate version.

Penalty: $95 a year or 0.5 percent of a household’s income, whichever is greater, in 2014; $495 or 1 percent of income in 2015; $750 or 2 percent of income in 2016 (with a maximum of $2,250 for a family). The penalty would be adjusted for inflation after 2016. No penalty if the cost of cheapest available plan exceeds 8 percent of household income.

Exemptions: American Indians, people with religious objections, people who can show financial hardship and people with income below 100 percent of the poverty level ($22,050 for a family of four).

from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/11/19/us/politics/1119-plan-comparison.html

sounds like a lot of people will be paying the 750 +inflation dollar penalty to me. I mean that poverty level is pretty low.

oh and the penalty for each family member.

>> ^marinara:

I'm actually glad to hear the penalty is not for poor families. but that's the first i've heard of it, and remember the bill hasn't passed the senate yet as of today.
all we have now is the old senate version.


Actually, the reconciliation bill passed the Senate and the House already. Looks like Obama hasn't signed it yet, but everything's been voted on and passed.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^marinara:
I'm actually glad to hear the penalty is not for poor families. but that's the first i've heard of it, and remember the bill hasn't passed the senate yet as of today.
all we have now is the old senate version.

Actually, the reconciliation bill passed the Senate and the House already. Looks like Obama hasn't signed it yet, but everything's been voted on and passed.


Yeah, supposedly he'll sign it on Tuesday. I'm completely unclear on why he delayed, but I suppose it doesn't matter.