|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States22883 Posts
FWIW, Obamacare has been pretty fantastic for me. My Obamacare BCBS policy was much better than the higher priced BCBS policy I had before.
However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange
Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits.
|
FLINT, Mich. (AP) — Federal officials warned Flint residents Friday that water samples from more than two dozen locations have higher lead levels than can be treated by filters that have been widely distributed to deal with the city's contamination crisis, underscoring the need for all residents to have their water tested.
Dr. Nicole Lurie of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services said the lead level in some Flint locations has exceeded 150 parts per billion, which is the level for which water filters are graded. In one case, it was in the thousands. She said people with levels over 150 ppb were being notified and their water being retested.
"We aren't completely sure why" the readings are so high, Lurie said. "It could be the way the samples were collected. We'll be doing more testing this whole weekend and early next week to figure out why and exactly what that means."
Tests began in the last week in December, and 26 sites out of about 4,000 showed the higher levels. The water was tested by officials before it got to a filter, and Lurie stressed that the results do not mean officials think there's a problem with the filters.
"We still have confidence in the filters," said Mark Durno of the EPA. "If you have not had your water tested, get it tested now."
Officials stressed that pregnant women and children under 6 at the sites with the elevated lead levels should only drink and prepare food with bottled water. How many people in the city who have been using the tap water, even with filters, is unclear.
Source
|
On January 31 2016 19:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2016 19:32 Danglars wrote:On January 31 2016 14:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Republicans have spent nearly six years promising to repeal Obamacare and, for most of that time, they have refused to acknowledge what that would mean for the millions who would lose their health insurance.
On Saturday afternoon in Iowa, for at least a few minutes, one Republican couldn't get away with it.
It happened at a Ted Cruz campaign event in Hubbard, a small town smack in the middle of the state. According to reports in The New York Times, The Washington Post and Politico, Cruz fielded a question from Mike Valde, a Democratic voter who had come to the event with a story to tell and a simple question to ask.
The story was about his brother-in-law, a barber named Mark. As Valde told it, Mark was a small business owner who worked so hard that he didn’t even take paid days off. But Mark was unable to afford health insurance until the Affordable Care Act became law. When it did, Mark bought insurance and then, when he started feeling ill, saw a physician -- who promptly diagnosed him with cancer with no hope for recovery. He died last year.
“He had never been to a doctor for years,” Valde said, reportedly on the verge of tears. “Multiple tumors behind his heart, his liver, his pancreas. And they said, ‘We’re sorry, sir, there’s nothing we can do for you.’"
The room fell silent, according to the Times' account, and then Valde, who later told reporters that he was a Hillary Clinton supporter, posed his question: “Mark never had health care until Obamacare. What are you going to replace it with?”
Cruz offered Valde his condolences before launching into the same basic argument that Republicans always make. “Under Obamacare,” Cruz said, “millions of Americans have lost their jobs. Millions of Americans have lost their doctors, have seen their premiums skyrocket.” He pointed out that Obama had promised families would see average savings of $2500 from health care reform, and joked that he’d gladly encourage anybody who'd actually reaped such savings to vote for Clinton -- a quip that drew laughter from the audience. Source I'll give HuffPo props: they started out fine. Republicans have spent six years promising to repeal Obamacare. They could've even written a different article to make good points in that vein. Endless votes ending in vetoes have damaged the credibility of the repeal efforts. Republican leaders have already pledged to do anything to keep the government running, meaning their one card to play is frozen. They've violated campaign pledges and will look to lose seats in both houses in November. After all, they have nothing to show for campaign promises for limited government and health care reform. However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange Cruz offered Valde his condolences before launching into the same basic argument that Republicans always make. It's actually rather telling, this bit. One side has stopped listening--it doesn't really matter what follows. He asked a question ala "What are you going to do?" If you're a Clinton supporter, or what qualifies as journalists these days, nothing short of a complete disavowal of the policies you advocate to fix the exact problem will suffice. Wrap it up with the contrast of laughter against the grieving man. It suits the hit job that was evident from "refused to acknowledge" onward. The problem is the same as it has always been. So Obamacare is bad. What better system do you have? All Republicans have done is yell "its bad, its bad" over and over again and not once did even a hint of solution present itself. its always "its bad" never "this would be better". '
They (many of the candidates including Cruz) have 'replacement' plans (with varying degrees of detail) some of which would solve the pre-existing condition problem. (at least as much as the ACA has). Why he didn't talk about it here I don't know.
|
On February 01 2016 00:54 Jibba wrote:
Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits.
The first claim of yours is questionable. There's evidence that some, if not most, of the cost savings came from effects of the recession.
As for the second part, you are correct. The people that don't benefit (and haven't benefited) much from Obamacare are those that are healthy. For the most part, those people picked up plans (if at all) with a few grand in deductibles and $100-200k in max healthcare coverage. Those plans were dirt-cheap before, because they basically only covered you if you stepped in front of a speeding car and survived. Any serious chronic and terminal illness would have blown past that cap, while any chronic issue that needed consistent therapy and/or drugs wouldn't meet the deductible threshold.
On February 01 2016 01:13 Krikkitone wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2016 19:37 Gorsameth wrote:On January 31 2016 19:32 Danglars wrote:On January 31 2016 14:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Republicans have spent nearly six years promising to repeal Obamacare and, for most of that time, they have refused to acknowledge what that would mean for the millions who would lose their health insurance.
On Saturday afternoon in Iowa, for at least a few minutes, one Republican couldn't get away with it.
It happened at a Ted Cruz campaign event in Hubbard, a small town smack in the middle of the state. According to reports in The New York Times, The Washington Post and Politico, Cruz fielded a question from Mike Valde, a Democratic voter who had come to the event with a story to tell and a simple question to ask.
The story was about his brother-in-law, a barber named Mark. As Valde told it, Mark was a small business owner who worked so hard that he didn’t even take paid days off. But Mark was unable to afford health insurance until the Affordable Care Act became law. When it did, Mark bought insurance and then, when he started feeling ill, saw a physician -- who promptly diagnosed him with cancer with no hope for recovery. He died last year.
“He had never been to a doctor for years,” Valde said, reportedly on the verge of tears. “Multiple tumors behind his heart, his liver, his pancreas. And they said, ‘We’re sorry, sir, there’s nothing we can do for you.’"
The room fell silent, according to the Times' account, and then Valde, who later told reporters that he was a Hillary Clinton supporter, posed his question: “Mark never had health care until Obamacare. What are you going to replace it with?”
Cruz offered Valde his condolences before launching into the same basic argument that Republicans always make. “Under Obamacare,” Cruz said, “millions of Americans have lost their jobs. Millions of Americans have lost their doctors, have seen their premiums skyrocket.” He pointed out that Obama had promised families would see average savings of $2500 from health care reform, and joked that he’d gladly encourage anybody who'd actually reaped such savings to vote for Clinton -- a quip that drew laughter from the audience. Source I'll give HuffPo props: they started out fine. Republicans have spent six years promising to repeal Obamacare. They could've even written a different article to make good points in that vein. Endless votes ending in vetoes have damaged the credibility of the repeal efforts. Republican leaders have already pledged to do anything to keep the government running, meaning their one card to play is frozen. They've violated campaign pledges and will look to lose seats in both houses in November. After all, they have nothing to show for campaign promises for limited government and health care reform. However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange Cruz offered Valde his condolences before launching into the same basic argument that Republicans always make. It's actually rather telling, this bit. One side has stopped listening--it doesn't really matter what follows. He asked a question ala "What are you going to do?" If you're a Clinton supporter, or what qualifies as journalists these days, nothing short of a complete disavowal of the policies you advocate to fix the exact problem will suffice. Wrap it up with the contrast of laughter against the grieving man. It suits the hit job that was evident from "refused to acknowledge" onward. The problem is the same as it has always been. So Obamacare is bad. What better system do you have? All Republicans have done is yell "its bad, its bad" over and over again and not once did even a hint of solution present itself. its always "its bad" never "this would be better". ' They (many of the candidates including Cruz) have 'replacement' plans (with varying degrees of detail) some of which would solve the pre-existing condition problem. (at least as much as the ACA has). Why he didn't talk about it here I don't know.
Only thing I could find on Cruz's alternative is that he would allow you to buy health insurance from another state. I don't know how that would solve anything.
|
On February 01 2016 00:54 Jibba wrote:FWIW, Obamacare has been pretty fantastic for me. My Obamacare BCBS policy was much better than the higher priced BCBS policy I had before. Show nested quote +However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange You just criticized anecdotes, and then proceeded to list a bunch of things without evidence. Even the numbers in the NYT article are only focused around median deductibles and not average plans or average costs. I was easily able to find a silver plan with a $1400 deductible and pretty reasonable premium, without receiving any credits. Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits.
The thing is that most working adult will not need see a doctor. Adding people who do not need health insurance is just slapping an additional financial burden on them during our weak economic times. It's old people and people with chronic illnesses who make up most of our healthcare costs. 5% of the population make up over 50% of the healthcare costs and 1% make up over 20% of the healthcare costs.
+ Show Spoiler +IMO these people refuse to die with grace and are propped up by modern medicine. People with "chronic illnesses" are also getting sapped by big pharma and boost healthcare costs.
|
On January 31 2016 22:44 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +Ted Cruz has come under fire just two days before the Iowa caucuses for sending mailers to voters here that accuse them of a “voting violation”, earning the Texas senator and his campaign a formal denunciation by top officials in the first-in-the-nation voting state.
The mailers, which came to light on Friday and were confirmed by Cruz’s campaign as their own, include a voting score and the phrase “official public record”. They call out by name not only the recipients, but also their neighbors, as part of a broader attempt to shame Iowans for not having participated in prior elections.
Paul Pate, Iowa’s Republican secretary of state, condemned Cruz’s campaign on Saturday for distributing the mailers. He said the strategy “misrepresents the role of my office, and worse, misrepresents Iowa election law”.
“Accusing citizens of Iowa of a ‘voting violation’ based on Iowa caucus participation, or lack thereof, is false representation of an official act,” Pate said in a statement.
“There is no such thing as an election violation related to frequency of voting. Any insinuation or statement to the contrary is wrong and I believe it is not in keeping in the spirit of the Iowa caucuses.”
Cruz struck a defiant tone in a swift response: “I apologize to nobody for using every tool we can to encourage Iowa voters to come out and vote,” he said at a press conference in Sioux City on Saturday evening. The senator went on to argue that the Iowa Republican Party had previously used such mailers and characterized them as “routine”.
The literature was “a standard mailer that folks at the Iowa Republican party and other get-out-the-vote groups have used to help motivate low-propensity voters,” said Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier. “We’re going to do everything we can to turn these folks out.”
Matt Schultz, Cruz’s Iowa state chairman and a former secretary of state here, added that the mailer was modelled after similar mailers in the 2014 midterm elections that were sent out by the Republican party of Iowa. Source
Wtf?
How is this legally allowed?
|
On February 01 2016 01:56 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2016 00:54 Jibba wrote:FWIW, Obamacare has been pretty fantastic for me. My Obamacare BCBS policy was much better than the higher priced BCBS policy I had before. However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange You just criticized anecdotes, and then proceeded to list a bunch of things without evidence. Even the numbers in the NYT article are only focused around median deductibles and not average plans or average costs. I was easily able to find a silver plan with a $1400 deductible and pretty reasonable premium, without receiving any credits. Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits. The thing is that most working adult will not need see a doctor. Adding people who do not need health insurance is just slapping an additional financial burden on them during our weak economic times. It's old people and people with chronic illnesses who make up most of our healthcare costs. 5% of the population make up over 50% of the healthcare costs and 1% make up over 20% of the healthcare costs. + Show Spoiler +IMO these people refuse to die with grace and are propped up by modern medicine. People with "chronic illnesses" are also getting sapped by big pharma and boost healthcare costs.
Wow...
|
http://fusion.net/story/261418/quintonio-legrier-shooting-robert-rialmo-lawsuit/
On Thursday, Joel Brodsky, the attorney for officer Rialmo, told Fusion that he plans to file a counter lawsuit against LeGrier’s estate, citing emotional distress and assault. The officer claims LeGrier assaulted him prior to firing his gun.
Only in america. Cop shoots teen six times, twice in the back - in the process he also kills an innocent bystander (something i always claimed will happen if cops just empty their mags with foam around their mouths), a mother of five: and now, because that's so distressing to HIM, he's gonna sue the father. Because that whole thing totally was the kids fault, and if the kid would have miraculously survived the execution, he'd be sued for felony murder.
The fuck is wrong with chicagos police force?
|
On February 01 2016 01:56 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2016 00:54 Jibba wrote:FWIW, Obamacare has been pretty fantastic for me. My Obamacare BCBS policy was much better than the higher priced BCBS policy I had before. However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange You just criticized anecdotes, and then proceeded to list a bunch of things without evidence. Even the numbers in the NYT article are only focused around median deductibles and not average plans or average costs. I was easily able to find a silver plan with a $1400 deductible and pretty reasonable premium, without receiving any credits. Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits. The thing is that most working adult will not need see a doctor. Adding people who do not need health insurance is just slapping an additional financial burden on them during our weak economic times. It's old people and people with chronic illnesses who make up most of our healthcare costs. 5% of the population make up over 50% of the healthcare costs and 1% make up over 20% of the healthcare costs. + Show Spoiler +IMO these people refuse to die with grace and are propped up by modern medicine. People with "chronic illnesses" are also getting sapped by big pharma and boost healthcare costs.
Congratulations, you have found how universal healthcare works. The healthy pay for the sick and when they get sick themselves others pay for them.
Because no average citizen saving just for themselves can afford serious medical bills.
And seriously? you went for the 'Die with grace' (aka whenever it is not inconvenient for me) argument?
|
On February 01 2016 02:03 m4ini wrote:http://fusion.net/story/261418/quintonio-legrier-shooting-robert-rialmo-lawsuit/Show nested quote +On Thursday, Joel Brodsky, the attorney for officer Rialmo, told Fusion that he plans to file a counter lawsuit against LeGrier’s estate, citing emotional distress and assault. The officer claims LeGrier assaulted him prior to firing his gun. Only in america. Cop shoots teen six times, twice in the back - in the process he also kills an innocent bystander (something i always claimed will happen if cops just empty their mags with foam around their mouths), a mother of five: and now, because that's so distressing to HIM, he's gonna sue the father. Because that whole thing totally was the kids fault, and if the kid would have miraculously survived the execution, he'd be sued for felony murder. The fuck is wrong with chicagos police force?
He can sue all he wants, that has nothing to do with the police force (tho yes they are shit). Anyone can sue anyone else for whatever they want. Its up to the court to laugh in his face and tell him to f*** off.
|
Norway28561 Posts
yeah wtf deathstar? the problem with health care is that old people refuse to just die when they get sick in a way that's gonna be costly? or that we as a society try to keep them alive rather than killing them once costs are too high?
|
Here's the issue. We are going to have more and more old people in the US. This is only the tip of the iceberg.
I would hope that many of these old people would have either their own money or support from their family, but frankly to what extent should the government be providing for their healthcare (medicare)? Getting old is a part of life and dying is a part of life. And the older they get the weaker and more vulnerable they become. We also know that the few years before an old person dies is when they use up healthcare like mad.
If we can have programs, like old people exercise programs and high nutrition food, that encourage higher quality of life while they are alive, then that's great. But if they are near their death and as I said, "propped up", then to what end are we going to support them?
|
On February 01 2016 02:13 Deathstar wrote:
Here's the issue. We are going to have more and more old people in the US. This is only the tip of the iceberg.
I would hope that many of these old people would have either their own money or support from their family, but frankly to what extent should the government be providing for their healthcare (medicare)? Getting old is a part of life and dying is a part of life. And the older they get the weaker and more vulnerable they become. We also know that the few years before an old person dies is when they use up healthcare like mad.
If we can have programs, like old people exercise programs and high nutrition food, that encourage higher quality of life while they are alive, then that's great. But if they are near their death and as I said, "propped up", then to what end are we going to support them?
Mass euthanasia camps for everyone older to 70, kill em off before they become a drag on society!
That is basically what your advertising.. I don't even...
Do your parents know you will tell the doctor to kill them the moment they get their first serious illness?
Will you stand over their graves and think to yourself "thank god I got rid of them early before they got expensive"?
Christ man.
|
United States42004 Posts
Healthcare costs range from anywhere between $1 and infinity $ because you can always spend more to get a better quality of service. How much to spend, and how to spend it, is a big part of the debate in every country with universal healthcare because there is always some crying grandchild who is upset because grandma is dying. You have identified a problem that is not new, nor unsolvable. It is a problem that is routinely addressed in every other first world country.
There is a dialogue between politicians and people about what healthcare policy should be and how it should be implemented. If the people like what the politicians say then they vote for that plan and then pay for it in taxes. If another politician says something they like more then they vote for that guy. It's not too hard.
You're not really looking for an answer though. Your "to what end should we support them" is just you leading to "we all agree that there has to be a hypothetical limit and because there is a hypothetical limit we might as well not do it at all".
Watch me make the same argument with education. "How long should we keep educating people? As long as they want? What if they spend their entire lives at school, what if they die owing billions in student loans and never having paid any taxes? What then?!?! It's not worth risking, I draw the line at A is for Apple.".
|
We don't need to go to extremes here...
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
the clutz argument endgame is approaching once again.
|
Norway28561 Posts
It actually is possible to frame your statement or opinion in a way that makes sense, and where it becomes a difficult ethical dilemma. Your recent post does a better job at it than your first one. Basically, what's the ceiling for what government should provide in terms of life-prolonging medical services? $100k for one extra year? $1 million for 1 extra year? $5 million for 1 extra year? In a world with limited resources and where health care might compete with education, and where $500k might give 1 person 1 extra year of heavily medicated kinda painful existence, or where it might pay for 8 teachers supplying education for 100 children, yeah, this is a genuinely difficult situation to handle politically. I'm glad I'm not in charge of attempting to figure out how many essential government services we should cut down on attempting to prolong the life of terminally ill patients.
But accepting that there are some difficult ethical questions relating to this is way different from saying that the problem is that people refuse to die with grace. Hardly anyone dies with grace. Hardly anyone will accept that keeping their mom alive was 'just too expensive'. The reason why your statement is met with such immediate disdain is that it's almost morbidly callous in its disregard for life- if you're going to start a discussion on such a sensitive issue, you will probably find that you get better answers if you frame it differently from how you did.
|
LOS ANGELES (AP) — The federal government has agreed to stop approving oil fracking off the California coast until it studies whether the practice is safe for the environment, according to legal settlements filed Friday.
Separate deals reached with a pair of environmental organizations require the Department of Interior to review whether well techniques such as using acid or hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, to stimulate offshore well production threatens water quality and marine life.
The practices have been conducted for years in federal waters and were revealed when the Environmental Defense Center filed Freedom of Information Act requests, the organization said.
"These practices are currently being conducted under decades-old plans with out-of-date or nonexistent environmental analysis," said Brian Segee, an attorney for the Environmental Defense Center.
The agreements in Los Angeles federal court apply to operations off Ventura and Santa Barbara counties, where companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp. operate platforms.
Federal agencies will have to complete the review by the end of May and determine if a more in-depth analysis is necessary. They will also have to make future permit applications publicly accessible.
A Department of Interior spokeswoman said the agency would comply with the agreement and is committed to safe offshore operations.
The American Petroleum Institute, which intervened in the cases as a defendant and did not agree to the settlement, issued a statement saying it did not think the environmental review was needed and did not think a permit moratorium was justified.
Source
|
On February 01 2016 02:03 m4ini wrote:http://fusion.net/story/261418/quintonio-legrier-shooting-robert-rialmo-lawsuit/Show nested quote +On Thursday, Joel Brodsky, the attorney for officer Rialmo, told Fusion that he plans to file a counter lawsuit against LeGrier’s estate, citing emotional distress and assault. The officer claims LeGrier assaulted him prior to firing his gun. Only in america. Cop shoots teen six times, twice in the back - in the process he also kills an innocent bystander (something i always claimed will happen if cops just empty their mags with foam around their mouths), a mother of five: and now, because that's so distressing to HIM, he's gonna sue the father. Because that whole thing totally was the kids fault, and if the kid would have miraculously survived the execution, he'd be sued for felony murder. The fuck is wrong with chicagos police force?
I think you ought to be a little more objective in your assessment. Apparently he sues because the family lied multiple times about the events that unfolded. The city has also assessed that it was legitimate self-defense on the part of the officer. It would seem that there was no foam around the officers mouth (he only fired 6 of 16 shots), nor was it an execution as the officer (according to the city) tried to let the kid surrender and it wasn't until the kid tried to assault him with a bat that he fired.
How about we let the courts decide before we jump the gun?
|
On February 01 2016 01:56 Deathstar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2016 00:54 Jibba wrote:FWIW, Obamacare has been pretty fantastic for me. My Obamacare BCBS policy was much better than the higher priced BCBS policy I had before. However, all we get is the bleeding heart tripe that's trotted out every time there's a push for limited government. It doesn't matter if ten families are struggling to cope with their increased health premiums and it's crushing them. They'll find someone with a story to tell hitting all the major heartstrings. He's a hard worker, a small business owner, he didn't get checkups from financial necessity, his life-saving Obamacare came too late! It's a Hollywood plotline, the kind that ignores the millions of others that lost health care plans they liked from Obamacare. Struggling workers sandwiched between rising premiums and rising deductible for the entry-level plans are just a statistic ( NYT). One large health insurance provider pulling out of the exchange You just criticized anecdotes, and then proceeded to list a bunch of things without evidence. Even the numbers in the NYT article are only focused around median deductibles and not average plans or average costs. I was easily able to find a silver plan with a $1400 deductible and pretty reasonable premium, without receiving any credits. Beyond that, it's demonstrably brought down health care inflation (reflected in multiple indexes) while actually expanding coverage/adding more people into it. People are upset that they have to pay more to receive the minimum coverage, but the alternative was them not having it or having less-than-adequate coverage, and then driving up costs through ER visits. The thing is that most working adult will not need see a doctor. Adding people who do not need health insurance is just slapping an additional financial burden on them during our weak economic times. It's old people and people with chronic illnesses who make up most of our healthcare costs. 5% of the population make up over 50% of the healthcare costs and 1% make up over 20% of the healthcare costs. + Show Spoiler +IMO these people refuse to die with grace and are propped up by modern medicine. People with "chronic illnesses" are also getting sapped by big pharma and boost healthcare costs.
On February 01 2016 02:22 Deathstar wrote:
We don't need to go to extremes here...
You just said that the ill and elderly should just die gracefully instead of wanting healthcare and medicine to try and get better.
You're worried about other people going to extremes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
