The President Obama Thread

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Motown Marvel

obamacare isnt perfect and has its problems. but you know what would help all this health care crap? if businesses werent constantly trying to exploit the faults of healthcare and act like responsible employers. i bet we'd get somewhere if businesses were more intent on balancing the well being of their employees with their bottom line, rather than sacrificing their employees for their bottom line.

Sorry, but they aren't in business to employee people, they are in business to make a profit. If they can do that efficiently and effectively with fewer employees, why wouldn't they?

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Oh we haven't even touched the problem yet of "not enough doctors" for the "Baby Boomer Generation" retiring...that is a WHOLE OTHER PROBLEM that is about the hit the fan.

Right now it is the letting go of employees to stay below the mandate, next we will begin to see the problem with not enough doctor's for the amount of people about to hit...

I got no insurance so...I'm just gonna sit this one out and 'watch the fireworks'.

Oh, and watch my fav tv crew..Red Eye talk about this. Of course FOX NEWS saves money by not always having Red Eye on, let alone Greg on half the time it seems like.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

I got no insurance so...I'm just gonna sit this one out and 'watch the fireworks'.

Oh, and watch my fav tv crew..Red Eye talk about this. Of course FOX NEWS saves money by not always having Red Eye on, let alone Greg on half the time it seems like.

He's on "The Five" everyday...that is where I watch him, I really like that show.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Kelly

He's on "The Five" everyday...that is where I watch him, I really like that show.

That show is so boring it made my soul cry. Which makes sense, cause I pretty much dislike 23 of the 24 hours on FOX NEWS. The one hour I like is Red Eye.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

The Govt should not be forcing health care on it's people. That's not a free society. Let businesses compete for their workers and their profit by letting them create better worker environments and benefits. How would you like it if you were a CEO of a major fast food company or retailer and the Govt was telling you what to do via enforcing govt health care? Govt health care won't work, because we are facing a shortage of doctors in this country and by now making people buy into the Govt Healthcare or paying a fine/tax (which in some cases is cheaper than buying into the Govt Healthcare) is not really right. It puts stress on our doctors.

No society is free. We cant have sex with corpses, shoot our neighbors dog, shag on streets, get drunk in public, vandalize, drive without insurance, build on our property without permits etc etc. We need a smart society not a 100% free society. It aggravates me when I go in the emergency room and here someone say they dont have insurance which means they are never going to pay their huge ass bill because they werent prepared. Running around thinking your invincible is no way to go through life. I really cant fathom why someone wouldnt want health insurance besides an inability to afford it and those people should be helped. My employer pays for my insurance. Doesnt cost me a thing. Why shouldnt everyone who works for a million/billion dollar corporation get that. Im sorry but when you bring in yearly profits like McDs and Walmart there is no excuse for not covering your employees except greed. Like I said I really do understand in the case of small mom and pop shops. They honestly cant afford it which is why the system has to be reworked and fixed to help in those cases. Im not saying Obamacare is the golden goose it isnt and has way too many loopholes for corps to wiggle their way out of it. I hope someone can fix the system properly and one day we can insure all our citizens.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

No society is free. We cant have sex with corpses, shoot our neighbors dog, shag on streets, get drunk in public, vandalize, drive without insurance, build on our property without permits etc etc. We need a smart society not a 100% free society. It aggravates me when I go in the emergency room and here someone say they dont have insurance which means they are never going to pay their huge ass bill because they werent prepared. Running around thinking your invincible is no way to go through life. I really cant fathom why someone wouldnt want health insurance besides an inability to afford it and those people should be helped. My employer pays for my insurance. Doesnt cost me a thing. Why shouldnt everyone who works for a million/billion dollar corporation get that. Im sorry but when you bring in yearly profits like McDs and Walmart there is no excuse for not covering your employees except greed. Like I said I really do understand in the case of small mom and pop shops. They honestly cant afford it which is why the system has to be reworked and fixed to help in those cases. Im not saying Obamacare is the golden goose it isnt and has way too many loopholes for corps to wiggle their way out of it. I hope someone can fix the system properly and one day we can insure all our citizens.

Well, first off you are going with extremes.

Second, New Hampishere is a Free state, one is not required by state law to have auto insurance. Check......and mate there. Hint..why it's the Live Free or Die State. ....

http://freestateproject.org/101Reasons

I rather see insurance companies and businesses compete for well, business and profit and what not, than the Govt do yet another thing while we are basically bankrupt. Obamacare itself is a 1 Trillion Tax on the people now.

[Siby]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

Well, first off you are going with extremes.

Second, New Hampishere is a Free state, one is not required by state law to have auto insurance. Check......and mate there. Hint..why it's the Live Free or Die State. ....

http://freestateproject.org/101Reasons

I rather see insurance companies and businesses compete for well, business and profit and what not, than the Govt do yet another thing while we are basically bankrupt. Obamacare itself is a 1 Trillion Tax on the people now.

I think it is pretty laughable the whole "Live Free" mantra. Even NH can't live totally "free", realizing that you still need laws in a society. NH is living "Sorta Free" in a federal union. NH has the right to quote the 2nd amendment not because it is free but because it is allowed that right.

If healthcare for everyone is so bad why does Congress have it for all its members for life? Why does no one try to repeal that?

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

Well, first off you are going with extremes.

Second, New Hampishere is a Free state, one is not required by state law to have auto insurance. Check......and mate there. Hint..why it's the Live Free or Die State. ....

http://freestateproject.org/101Reasons

I rather see insurance companies and businesses compete for well, business and profit and what not, than the Govt do yet another thing while we are basically bankrupt. Obamacare itself is a 1 Trillion Tax on the people now.

Yeah and I get aggravated when a state doesnt require auto insurance as well. How I love to get rear ended and find out ****head doesnt have auto insurance.

Really if everyone wasnt so damn selfish and me me me me all the time and screwing everyone for a profit we wouldnt need the government to step in and try to help and "fix" stuff. We may be called "United" States but we are the most self serving self centered people I know of. We are so interested in being "free" that we will say "**** it" and not even try to better ourselves and this country unless their is a profit in it. Not saying im not guilty and excluded from the problem but seriously the people are equally responsible for the hole this country is in. Health care should have been fixed and proofed before there was ever a problem. We should always be working to improve our system and way of life. Its like our tax system. Total cluster**** full of loopholes that put money in the wrong pockets. Do we fix it? Nope. We just ***** back and forth across the aisle and offer up some half assed compromise.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Siby

I think it is pretty laughable the whole "Live Free" mantra. Even NH can't live totally "free", realizing that you still need laws in a society. NH is living "Sorta Free" in a federal union. NH has the right to quote the 2nd amendment not because it is free but because it is allowed that right.

If healthcare for everyone is so bad why does Congress have it for all its members for life? Why does no one try to repeal that?

Pretty sure there are people trying to end that for Congress. Problem, or a problem, is that the two party system probably doesn't want to change that for it's own members.

Originally Posted by Marvolo

Yeah and I get aggravated when a state doesnt require auto insurance as well. How I love to get rear ended and find out ****head doesnt have auto insurance.

Really if everyone wasnt so damn selfish and me me me me all the time and screwing everyone for a profit we wouldnt need the government to step in and try to help and "fix" stuff. We may be called "United" States but we are the most self serving self centered people I know of. We are so interested in being "free" that we will say "**** it" and not even try to better ourselves and this country unless their is a profit in it. Not saying im not guilty and excluded from the problem but seriously the people are equally responsible for the hole this country is in. Health care should have been fixed and proofed before there was ever a problem. We should always be working to improve our system and way of life.

Yes, we do live in a 'Me, Me, Me' society. But that isn't a totally problem. That's also a sign of living in a free society. We have too many things we have to buy into as we grow older it seems. Gotta have this cause it's the law, gotta have that cause it's the law. No...not a fan of that.

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

Pretty sure there are people trying to end that for Congress. Problem, or a problem, is that the two party system probably doesn't want to change that for it's own members.

People want that ended because its expensive and why should they get golden standard life insurance with our tax dollars while we get ****?

Yes, we do live in a 'Me, Me, Me' society. But that isn't a totally problem. That's also a sign of living in a free society. We have too many things we have to buy into as we grow older it seems. Gotta have this cause it's the law, gotta have that cause it's the law. No...not a fan of that.

Well as I said, why wouldnt you want insurance? Its to insure against inevitable situations and in the case of auto insurance pays for damage you cause other people. As for health insurance a truly advanced society and prosperous society should be able to ensure the health and support of its people. And how free is a country where those who cant afford insurance are dying because they cant get medical help? The facts and data is out there. Many die yearly because they didnt get proper medical care because a hospital only has to stabilize those without insurance. They return home their body fails and they die. Had they been in a hospital they would have lived. Shouldnt we be moving toward a system that can avoid this? These people dying are americans. You know the people we are supposed to be united with. Shouldnt we be working to help our own people? Families support and help each other, and with any luck people will one day start thinking of us all as a family and less of a meat grinder where its survival of the fittest. Personally, Ill pay extra taxes if it means our society improves and this doesnt happen. I care more about the betterment of us as a collective and a people than just me.

Obviously I say this knowing that our current government couldnt improve society if it had a "how-to" book.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

People want that ended because its expensive and why should they get golden standard life insurance with our tax dollars while we get ****?





Well as I said, why wouldnt you want insurance? Its to insure against inevitable situations and in the case of auto insurance pays for damage you cause other people. As for health insurance a truly advanced society and prosperous society should be able to ensure the health and suplort of its people. And how free is a country where those who cant afford insurance are dying because they cant get medical help? The facts and data is out there. Many die yearly because they didnt get proper medical care because a hospital only has to stabilize those without I insurance. They return home their body faild and they die. Had they been in a hospital they would have lived. Shouldnt we be moving toward a system that can avoid this?

Well, having Health Insurance is a choice, rather it's good or bad, it's a choice. Like drinking, smoking, eating meat, it's a choice (Not good examples, but best off top of my head).

Um, also why should the Govt always be the ones to take care of us? It cannot even manage it's own check book. $16 Trillion in debt. And isn't Medicare and Medicard(sp?) there for poor people?

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

Well, having Health Insurance is a choice, rather it's good or bad, it's a choice. Like drinking, smoking, eating meat, it's a choice (Not good examples, but best off top of my head).

Um, also why should the Govt always be the ones to take care of us? It cannot even manage it's own check book. $16 Trillion in debt. And isn't Medicare and Medicard(sp?) there for poor people?

I edited my post to include that I recognize that our government could fix society if it had a how to book. Its too broken.

The government "tries" to take care of us because we have proven that we cant take care of ourselves.

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Marvolo

I edited my post to include that I recognize that our government could fix society if it had a how to book. Its too broken.

The government "tries" to take care of us because we have proven that we cant take care of ourselves.

Then it should let us fail, cause by trying to take care of us, it just causing debt and mostly failure and waste of time. It's too stretched.

[Two-Face=Badass]

I'll just say that as an Aussie under a single payer healthcare system reading this thread feels utterly alien and devoid of reality to me. I cannot imagine, as someone who has autoimmune hepatitis and autoimmune ulcerative colitis at the young age of twenty, where I would be without our healthcare system. I would find it incredibly hard to attend university, and would likely, especially with the wider costs of genetic disorders in my family, be considerably poorer and disadvantaged in society.

[Motown Marvel]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Sorry, but they aren't in business to employee people, they are in business to make a profit. If they can do that efficiently and effectively with fewer employees, why wouldn't they?

they arent in the business to employ people, but it is necessary for them to employ people in order to do their business just so they can turn a profit. i can respect the main goal of a business being to make a profit. but in doing so, you need to have some respect for the employees that afford you that profit. it is possible to balance your profit margin with how you treat your employees. accepting a slight profit loss in trade for the health of your employees is the sign of a respectable business owner. anyone who would sell their employees health for the sake of maximizing their bottom line is not. this is a matter of human decency.

[Siby]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Sorry, but they aren't in business to employee people, they are in business to make a profit. If they can do that efficiently and effectively with fewer employees, why wouldn't they?

For some reason this statement reminded me of the silly statement "Corporations are people". It is so focused on what a business is rather than how it fits into the society.

Schools don't exist to employ teachers, their function is to educate. If they can't do that efficiently and effectively with fewer teachers, lower wages, benefits, resources, why wouldn't they?

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

That show is so boring it made my soul cry. Which makes sense, cause I pretty much dislike 23 of the 24 hours on FOX NEWS. The one hour I like is Red Eye.

Yeah, ya probably have to think too much on The Five, Red Eye you can be stone on 5 different drugs and still understand what they are talking about...or at least what they are saying makes sense when you are stoned on 5 different drugs.

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by Siby

For some reason this statement reminded me of the silly statement "Corporations are people". It is so focused on what a business is rather than how it fits into the society.

Schools don't exist to employ teachers, their function is to educate. If they can't do that efficiently and effectively with fewer teachers, lower wages, benefits, resources, why wouldn't they?

No, it's simply fact....that is why businesses ARE IN BUSINESS, to make a profit, ACTUALLY "Corporations are people" falls more into your line of thinking than mine.

And yes, you can do much with fewer effective and efficient people than you can with those that are not effective and efficient.

Give me 5 effective and efficient teachers, over 5 of these teachers + 5 that have no clue what the hell they are doing, or are only doing it because they like the 3 months off in the summer. Also, those 5 working for me that do their job will be much happier without the other 5 even though their class sizes are larger. Contrary to popular belief, most studies show that class size has nothing to do with effective teaching. The teacher has everything to do with effective teaching. Just to give you an example, we have 2 Junior High's in our district, I am department head at one. In my team there are 2 teachers, myself, and another teacher. We have the same exact amount of students that the other junior high has....BUT, they have 3 teachers. Their teachers do not contribute to the curriculum, they do not come to inservices for further training half the time, they do nothing in the summers to further their education, and the make the same amount as we do. Our scores are higher than theirs by about 15 points EVERY TEST, yet they have fewer in their classrooms than we do. My classes and my cohorts classes are huge, doesn't matter...we know what we are teaching, we have good strategies, and we do our job. The other junior high has no accountability from their administration, they have about 15 students per class, AND 1 less class than we have. So, 2 teachers in this case, are doing much better than 3. Why? Because of hiring, because of administration holding the teachers accountable, and very simply because of teachers that just don't care, they just want a paycheck. This happens in business as well.

This goes into business as well. Businesses ARE realizing that if they have the right people hired, fewer people CAN DO THE JOB WELL. Or better effective use of their shifts, as far as fast food is concerned. It is simply better management...better hiring.

So, yeah....fact is, you hire the right people, not a certain # of people.

With all of that said, businesses wanting to make a profit isn't this "coldhearted" thing, it is simply the way it is....and hiring good people, and KEEPING THOSE PEOPLE to that business is the most important thing, NOT how many people they can hire, or what the unemployment rate is....

[enterthemadness]

Originally Posted by Kelly

Yeah, ya probably have to think too much on The Five, Red Eye you can be stone on 5 different drugs and still understand what they are talking about...or at least what they are saying makes sense when you are stoned on 5 different drugs.

that explains Bill Schultz having a job. And the time slot.

And to sound like I am on Red Eye now, how about we replace teachers with Robots from Skynet? The fear from those machines would get our kids test scores up!

[Kelly]

Originally Posted by enterthemadness

that explains Bill Schultz having a job. And the time slot.

And to sound like I am on Red Eye now, how about we replace teachers with Robots from Skynet? The fear from those machines would get our kids test scores up!

There is not a robot out there that could do what I do.... And I am MUCH MORE scary than a robot.

[dnno1]

White House Response to the Petition to raise funds to build a Death Star:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...-2016/wlfKzFkN

We petition the Obama Administration to:

Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.

Those who sign here petition the United States government to secure funding and resources, and begin construction on a Death Star by 2016.
By focusing our defense resources into a space-superiority platform and weapon system such as a Death Star, the government can spur job creation in the fields of construction, engineering, space exploration, and more, and strengthen our national defense.
Created: Nov 14, 2012
Issues: Defense, Job Creation, Science and Space Policy
total signatures

34,435

Official White House Response to Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.

This Isn't the Petition Response You're Looking For

By Paul Shawcross

The Administration shares your desire for job creation and a strong national defense, but a Death Star isn't on the horizon. Here are a few reasons:

• The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We're working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.
• The Administration does not support blowing up planets.
• Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?

However, look carefully (here's how) and you'll notice something already floating in the sky -- that's no Moon, it's a Space Station! Yes, we already have a giant, football field-sized International Space Station in orbit around the Earth that's helping us learn how humans can live and thrive in space for long durations. The Space Station has six astronauts -- American, Russian, and Canadian -- living in it right now, conducting research, learning how to live and work in space over long periods of time, routinely welcoming visiting spacecraft and repairing onboard garbage mashers, etc. We've also got two robot science labs -- one wielding a laser -- roving around Mars, looking at whether life ever existed on the Red Planet.
Keep in mind, space is no longer just government-only. Private American companies, through NASA's Commercial Crew and Cargo Program Office (C3PO), are ferrying cargo -- and soon, crew -- to space for NASA, and are pursuing human missions to the Moon this decade.
Even though the United States doesn't have anything that can do the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs, we've got two spacecraft leaving the Solar System and we're building a probe that will fly to the exterior layers of the Sun. We are discovering hundreds of new planets in other star systems and building a much more powerful successor to the Hubble Space Telescope that will see back to the early days of the universe.
We don't have a Death Star, but we do have floating robot assistants on the Space Station, a President who knows his way around a light saber and advanced (marshmallow) cannon, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is supporting research on building Luke's arm, floating droids, and quadruped walkers.
We are living in the future! Enjoy it. Or better yet, help build it by pursuing a career in a science, technology, engineering or math-related field. The President has held the first-ever White House science fairs and Astronomy Night on the South Lawn because he knows these domains are critical to our country's future, and to ensuring the United States continues leading the world in doing big things.
If you do pursue a career in a science, technology, engineering or math-related field, the Force will be with us! Remember, the Death Star's power to destroy a planet, or even a whole star system, is insignificant next to the power of the Force.


Paul Shawcross is Chief of the Science and Space Branch at the White House Office of Management and Budget

[souvlaki]

Originally Posted by dnno1

White House Response to the Petition to raise funds to build a Death Star:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...-2016/wlfKzFkN

Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?

[chaseter]

I bet that report took a month and a million dollars.

[Marx]

The countdown to the inauguration is officially underway and the new thread is up! Please be sure to subscribe and participate!

The 2013 Presidential Inauguration
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=451723

[Kelly]

Obama Labor Board Recess Appointments Are Unconstitutional, Federal Court Rules

WASHINGTON — In a setback for President Barack Obama, a federal appeals court ruled Friday that he violated the Constitution in making recess appointments last year, a decision that could severely curtail the president's ability to bypass the Senate to fill administration vacancies.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board because the Senate was officially in session – and not in recess – at the time. If the decision stands, it could invalidate hundreds of board decisions made over the past year.
The court also ruled that the president could only make recess appointments if the openings arise when the Senate is in an official recess, which it defined as the once-a-year break between sessions of Congress.
White House press secretary Jay Carney said the administration strongly disagrees with the decision and that the NLRB would continue to conduct business as usual, despite calls by some Republicans for the board members to resign.
"The decision is novel and unprecedented," Carney said. "It contradicts 150 years of practice by Democratic and Republican administrations."
The Justice Department hinted that the administration would likely appeal the decision by three conservative judges appointed by Republican presidents to the U.S. Supreme Court. "We disagree with the court's ruling and believe that the president's recess appointments are constitutionally sound," the statement said.
The court's decision acknowledges that it conflicts with what other federal appeals courts have held about when recess appointments are valid, which only added to the likelihood of an appeal to the high court.
The ruling also threw into question the legitimacy of Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray's appointment, also made on Jan. 4, 2012, has been challenged in a separate case.
Carney insisted the court's ruling affected only one case before the labor board and would have no bearing on Cordray's appointment. Obama on Thursday renominated Cordray for the job.