|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 13, 2013 23:01:40 GMT -8
This is simply tragic, and ought to disturb all Americans. The part I refer to is the dilemma of the mother in Oregon. What do you suppose President Obama would have to say about this? blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/08/13/the-high-cost-of-obamacare/(For a detailed report on the problem in Oregon, click on the first word of the story.) AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 14, 2013 5:01:26 GMT -8
As a born again Libertarian I am quite disturbed that the government is doing anything thing for this family. They should stand on their own. Why should my taxes go to pay for this? This is certainly something that the family should be doing. Where are the aunts, uncles, cousins? This what churches and charitys should be doing. Certainly not the government with my tax dollars.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 14, 2013 11:20:59 GMT -8
As a born again Libertarian I am quite disturbed that the government is doing anything thing for this family. They should stand on their own. Why should my taxes go to pay for this? This is certainly something that the family should be doing. Where are the aunts, uncles, cousins? This what churches and charitys should be doing. Certainly not the government with my tax dollars. Oh, my goodness! This response is so disappointing. First, you have completely ignored, and by doing so, trivialized, a very disturbing situation. Second, you have ignored the fact that the mother in this case will be forbidden from doing just what you so jokingly suggest she should be doing. She will be forbidden by ObamaCare from taking care of her child. Finally, some libertarians probably want to dismantle all government social programs. I'm not that radical. I do favor a very thorough review of such programs with an eye toward making them more efficient and less costly, and when programs overlap or do not deliver positive results (which should be a common finding), programs should be terminated. But that's just me. Once more, here's my main objection to your response; ACA will cause this Oregon mother to be unable to continue to care for her daughter. Did you miss that part? AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by azson on Aug 14, 2013 12:12:44 GMT -8
This is simply tragic, and ought to disturb all Americans. The part I refer to is the dilemma of the mother in Oregon. What do you suppose President Obama would have to say about this? blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/08/13/the-high-cost-of-obamacare/(For a detailed report on the problem in Oregon, click on the first word of the story.) AzWm Wm, you complain about the current tone in politics and then link to Peggy 'Defender of Racism' Noonan? (the fact that she feels it necessary to spend 3/4ths of her first paragraph regurgitating her feelings on the rodeo debacle tells me all I need to know about her) Why not just post the 'detailed report' link? And you, Win and the rest of the cons complain about Krugman and Reich Ed-Ops? Puh-lease. |
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 14, 2013 12:33:32 GMT -8
William -
You should know that many, if not all, private insurance companies do not compensate relatives who care for other relatives.
But then you probably already knew that.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 14, 2013 13:48:28 GMT -8
William - You should know that many, if not all, private insurance companies do not compensate relatives who care for other relatives. But then you probably already knew that. So, this is a non-story, is that right? Then why are the Oregon officials, who are extremely unlikely to be politically on the Right, seeking a waiver from the Feds? AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 14, 2013 14:03:57 GMT -8
This is simply tragic, and ought to disturb all Americans. The part I refer to is the dilemma of the mother in Oregon. What do you suppose President Obama would have to say about this? blogs.wsj.com/peggynoonan/2013/08/13/the-high-cost-of-obamacare/(For a detailed report on the problem in Oregon, click on the first word of the story.) AzWm Wm, you complain about the current tone in politics and then link to Peggy 'Defender of Racism' Noonan? (the fact that she feels it necessary to spend 3/4ths of her first paragraph regurgitating her feelings on the rodeo debacle tells me all I need to know about her) Why not just post the 'detailed report' link? And you, Win and the rest of the cons complain about Krugman and Reich Ed-Ops? Puh-lease. Well, first of all, Peggy Noonan is no racist and if your charge were not so patently ridiculous, it would be distasteful. Second, your suggestion that it would have been better to use only the secondary reference is a very good one. To be honest, it was only after I had posted the thread intro that I noticed that the first word of Noonan's piece was a hot link. Finally, it has just come to my attention that it is traditional for rodeo clowns to mock whoever is the current POTUS. If that is so, I think the story is a "phony scandal." Perhaps that is not a good tradition, but I can't see this nearly as bad as some of the things that were said about G.W. Bush. It is very clear that the current administration benefits from an atmosphere (largely of its own doing) in which virtually all anti-Obama criticisms are called racist. Heads I win, Tails you lose!
AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 14, 2013 15:00:43 GMT -8
This just in: seriously. At a 1994 New Jersey rodeo, a dummy wearing a George H.W. Bush mask was attacked by a bull. The dummy was destroyed and the mask went flying through the air.
The event was all but ignored by the press at the time.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 14, 2013 17:16:54 GMT -8
This response to one problem with the horribly written ObamaKare Act is so predictable from the lefties. It is disgusting to me to see such a shallow uncaring bunch of responses. This is just one more reason to gut this mess and start over piece meal.
Some form of single payer might even work under some strict conditions.
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 14, 2013 19:25:03 GMT -8
The woman can still take care of her daughter. She simply can not be paid by the state as caregiver, and be her guardian. It is an inherent conflict of interest. All that needs to be done is have someone else be appointed the daughter's guardian. Then Mom can continue being the state paid caregiver.
How did you cons miss that?
I have some suggestions, but want to keep the conversation on a high level. Feel free to use your imagination, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Aug 14, 2013 21:22:07 GMT -8
Some form of single payer might even work under some strict conditions. This is the only way the ACA would be overturned. And I agree, it would be a much better system. Too bad the Cons couldn't see the forest through the trees a couple years ago, huh? |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 14, 2013 21:46:39 GMT -8
The woman can still take care of her daughter. She simply can not be paid by the state as caregiver, and be her guardian. It is an inherent conflict of interest. All that needs to be done is have someone else be appointed the daughter's guardian. Then Mom can continue being the state paid caregiver. How did you cons miss that? I have some suggestions, but want to keep the conversation on a high level. Feel free to use your imagination, though. Do you have children? If you do, I am sure you care for them very dearly. Assuming that such is the case, I cannot understand your response. To suggest that, " Hey, let someone else be her legal guardian" seems really callous. I apologize if you take offense at my statement; I do not wish to offend. But, really, is that the best you can do? Again I ask, why are the Oregon officials seeking a waiver? I guess maybe they have had the decency to realize that maintaining the parent/child relationship, especially in the case of a special needs child, is paramount. Does it not occur to you that having to have another person be the guardian is both humiliating and unnecessary? This story would not exist if ObamaCare were not such a monstrosity of confusing rules and unintended consequences. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 14, 2013 22:09:16 GMT -8
The woman can still take care of her daughter. She simply can not be paid by the state as caregiver, and be her guardian. It is an inherent conflict of interest. All that needs to be done is have someone else be appointed the daughter's guardian. Then Mom can continue being the state paid caregiver. How did you cons miss that? I have some suggestions, but want to keep the conversation on a high level. Feel free to use your imagination, though. Do you have children? If you do, I am sure you care for them very dearly. Assuming that such is the case, I cannot understand your response. To suggest that, " Hey, let someone else be her legal guardian" seems really callous. I apologize if you take offense at my statement; I do not wish to offend. But, really, is that the best you can do? Again I ask, why are the Oregon officials seeking a waiver? I guess maybe they have had the decency to realize that maintaining the parent/child relationship, especially in the case of a special needs child, is paramount. Does it not occur to you that having to have another person be the guardian is both humiliating and unnecessary? This story would not exist if ObamaCare were not such a monstrosity of confusing rules and unintended consequences. AzWm Father. Is that too obvious? |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 15, 2013 10:26:34 GMT -8
Do you have children? If you do, I am sure you care for them very dearly. Assuming that such is the case, I cannot understand your response. To suggest that, " Hey, let someone else be her legal guardian" seems really callous. I apologize if you take offense at my statement; I do not wish to offend. But, really, is that the best you can do? Again I ask, why are the Oregon officials seeking a waiver? I guess maybe they have had the decency to realize that maintaining the parent/child relationship, especially in the case of a special needs child, is paramount. Does it not occur to you that having to have another person be the guardian is both humiliating and unnecessary? This story would not exist if ObamaCare were not such a monstrosity of confusing rules and unintended consequences. AzWm Father. Is that too obvious? Are you out of ideas? Look, I take the time to share my great wisdom. How about replying to the gist of my previous post. Telling a mother who has taken care of her special needs daughter for decades that she cannot any longer be the official parent is cruel and unnecessary. I'm also waiting for a reaction to the fact that the Oregon authorities are asking for a waiver. Added point: taxpayer money that goes to a parent in this case, and it surely must not come close to the expenses incurred by that parent, strikes me as acceptable. My guess is that many Libertarians might well agree with me on this point. AzWm |
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 15, 2013 10:46:09 GMT -8
Father. Is that too obvious? Are you out of ideas? Look, I take the time to share my great wisdom. How about replying to the gist of my previous post. Telling a mother who has taken care of her special needs daughter for decades that she cannot any longer be the official parent is cruel and unnecessary. I'm also waiting for a reaction to the fact that the Oregon authorities are asking for a waiver. Added point: taxpayer money that goes to a parent in this case, and it surely must not come close to the expenses incurred by that parent, strikes me as acceptable. My guess is that many Libertarians might well agree with me on this point. AzWm I must admit I burst into laughter when you said you had "great wisdom". Your wisdom could be put into my grandmother's thimble. Now, try paying attention. Let her father be her official guardian. With your "great wisdom" do you have a problem with her father being her guardian? Then her mother can be her paid care giver. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Post by azson on Aug 16, 2013 10:40:56 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 17, 2013 9:28:51 GMT -8
Are you out of ideas? Look, I take the time to share my great wisdom. How about replying to the gist of my previous post. Telling a mother who has taken care of her special needs daughter for decades that she cannot any longer be the official parent is cruel and unnecessary. I'm also waiting for a reaction to the fact that the Oregon authorities are asking for a waiver. Added point: taxpayer money that goes to a parent in this case, and it surely must not come close to the expenses incurred by that parent, strikes me as acceptable. My guess is that many Libertarians might well agree with me on this point. AzWm I must admit I burst into laughter when you said you had "great wisdom". Your wisdom could be put into my grandmother's thimble. Now, try paying attention. Let her father be her official guardian. With your "great wisdom" do you have a problem with her father being her guardian? Then her mother can be her paid care giver. Problem solved. Drone, do you now see that your mountain was a molehill? |
|
