EPT
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 491
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
MarlieChurphy
United States2063 Posts
I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4748 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote: Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?) I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. This isn't the place to ask, between the liberal bent of TL and the Europeans all congratulating us on a bill they don't know anything about, either. I don't know where you are even supposed to start at this point. Just know that wherever you go, it is going to be biased, one way or another. You have a long night ahead of you. edit: Wikipedia is ok for overview, but this law is VERY far reaching and you won't find all the info (especially info that is more critical of the law) on that page. It has 80+ references to the liberal "The New Republic" on that page, for example. | ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:27 Souma wrote: It's not universal healthcare. 30 million people still without health insurance. We are far, far from the ideal. Yeah, well it's still a major step forward. A "big fucking deal" as Biden said. People can as of right now, buy health insurance on the exchanges (http://www.healthcare.gov), possibly with subsidies depending on your situation. | ||
|
packrat386
United States5077 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote: Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?) I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. I would suggest wikipedia. Its pretty decent. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
packrat386
United States5077 Posts
| ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:30 MarlieChurphy wrote: Sorry, Can someone enlighten me on what exactly the Affordable Care Act is, and what it's supposed to do (and/or what it is actually doing?) I actually got a phone survey call a few months back asking me tons of questions about it and I basically just answered I don't know/I don't care to most of the stuff. It seems pretty convoluted at the least. 3 basic parts: -No one can be denied healthcare or charged more due to preexisting conditions, lifetime caps, etc, and all healthcare plans have at least a minimum standard of benefits -Everyone must get healthcare or be fined. Nothing changes if you already have healthcare. -There are subsidies to buy healthcare on exchanges here for low income families that can't afford it. Some plans are as cheap as $100 a month. | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
Can't believe this is actually happening. Correct me if I'm wrong, but funding for the ACA is mandatory spending, so it's not affected by a government shutdown. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:26 acker wrote: Do you have a source that contradicts the Treasury? It seems pretty clear that the ability to spend money is not at all the same thing as the ability to honor repayments. The treasury borrows cash to meet the government's cash commitments. Some of those commitments are creditor claims (interest payments and more broadly entitlement claims). Other commitments are 'essential' government services. Other claims are non-essential services. When we talk about 'default' we mean one specific thing - not making interest / principal payments on bonds. That's a very small portion of spending that can be prioritized. Hence, we'll have a government shutdown where non-essential spending will stop in order to preserve cash for higher priority items. | ||
|
packrat386
United States5077 Posts
| ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
My apologies. 40%, not 20%. Source And that's if we only consider those people to be creditors as opposed to, say, everybody the US government owes money to. Source | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:39 JonnyBNoHo wrote: The treasury borrows cash to meet the government's cash commitments. Some of those commitments are creditor claims (interest payments and more broadly entitlement claims). Other commitments are 'essential' government services. Other claims are non-essential services. When we talk about 'default' we mean one specific thing - not making interest / principal payments on bonds. That's a very small portion of spending that can be prioritized. Hence, we'll have a government shutdown where non-essential spending will stop in order to preserve cash for higher priority items. Just curious, does anyone have any idea how much cash the treasury has on hand? | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:39 JonnyBNoHo wrote: The treasury borrows cash to meet the government's cash commitments. Some of those commitments are creditor claims (interest payments and more broadly entitlement claims). Other commitments are 'essential' government services. Other claims are non-essential services. When we talk about 'default' we mean one specific thing - not making interest / principal payments on bonds. That's a very small portion of spending that can be prioritized. Hence, we'll have a government shutdown where non-essential spending will stop in order to preserve cash for higher priority items. You must have misunderstood me. I asked for a source that contradicts the Treasury's statement, not a couple of sentences by an anonymous TL poster. Unless you happen to be the personal embodiment of the Treasury. That's not the definition of default, either. Defaults happen when you can't pay for your obligated expenditures. | ||
|
packrat386
United States5077 Posts
| ||
|
Islandsnake
United States679 Posts
| ||
|
packrat386
United States5077 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:49 Islandsnake wrote: So who continues to get paid now? Just the military? Vital personnel basically. | ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
| ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:49 Islandsnake wrote: So who continues to get paid now? Just the military? Nobody but the Congressional staff people and a couple small areas gets paid. Pay to the military and other vital services gets deferred until the mess is fixed. Vital services still have to do unpaid work. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
On October 01 2013 13:32 Introvert wrote: This isn't the place to ask, between the liberal bent of TL and the Europeans all congratulating us on a bill they don't know anything about, either. I don't know where you are even supposed to start at this point. Just know that wherever you go, it is going to be biased, one way or another. You have a long night ahead of you. edit: Wikipedia is ok for overview, but this law is VERY far reaching and you won't find all the info (especially info that is more critical of the law) on that page. It has 80+ references to the liberal "The New Republic" on that page, for example. Jonathan Gruber wrote a pretty good comic book on the law. I suggest looking it up. If my suspicions are correct, you know even less about the law than even the average liberal TLer. | ||
| ||
