Bolas

So you agree that the government encourages freeloading? I'm not getting a clear answer. And yes, patient dumping was becoming a problem. Patient dumping was, um, getting rid of the freeloaders, right? And so what was a problem before has morphed changed into the massive problem because of the response to governmental solution. I'm glad you appreciate the religious aspect behind this. Those who agree are enlightened saints. Those who did not decide it was a really bad idea are ignorant sinners. Well stated! You have gone from the argument of "freeloading bad" to "enlightenment means covering freeloaders." Which is my point. This system does not end freeloading. The ACA RATIFIES freeloading and enables it by establishing the funding of freeloaders. I define freeloaders as people like Ms. Brown, the lead plaintiff, who could afford health insurance but chose to let others pay for her healthcare. The poor aren't freeloaders, they are simply poor. Even if your poster child declared bankruptcy to get out of paying the full amount they billed her, she likely still paid them more than they would have gotten from insurance and more than Medicare/Medicaid. So your definition of a freeloader is one who does not pay for other's medical care portion, only their own. Considering that hospitals can't collect from the poor, only collect a portion from insurance companies and even less from Medicare/Medicaid, they try to make up the difference on those without insurance. You go from an ASS-umption to fact in one paragraph. I made very clear what my definition is. Ms. Brown IS a freeloader. Have you ever declared bankruptcy or know someone who has? It's not something that people do to just get out of paying bills. All assets minus a small portion for transportation and housing are split amongst their creditors. This is the last step, in the meantime, they've likely paid most or all of the original balance owed but the majority of the money went to late fees and interest. Most of the time they aren't even paying the original creditor as they've sold the debt to a debt collection agency or agencies. Someone who declares bankruptcy is not a freeloader. Not by any means. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

So you agree that the government encourages freeloading? I'm not getting a clear answer. And yes, patient dumping was becoming a problem. Patient dumping was, um, getting rid of the freeloaders, right? And so what was a problem before has morphed changed into the massive problem because of the response to governmental solution. I'm glad you appreciate the religious aspect behind this. Those who agree are enlightened saints. Those who did not decide it was a really bad idea are ignorant sinners. Well stated! You have gone from the argument of "freeloading bad" to "enlightenment means covering freeloaders." Which is my point. This system does not end freeloading. The ACA RATIFIES freeloading and enables it by establishing the funding of freeloaders. I define freeloaders as people like Ms. Brown, the lead plaintiff, who could afford health insurance but chose to let others pay for her healthcare. The poor aren't freeloaders, they are simply poor. Even if your poster child declared bankruptcy to get out of paying the full amount they billed her, she likely still paid them more than they would have gotten from insurance and more than Medicare/Medicaid. So your definition of a freeloader is one who does not pay for other's medical care portion, only their own. Considering that hospitals can't collect from the poor, only collect a portion from insurance companies and even less from Medicare/Medicaid, they try to make up the difference on those without insurance. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

What's next is that over time, the ACA probably fails due to corruption in the system. Corporations instead of lowering rates, raise them, and they make out like bandits with little or no improvement in actual health care delivery. Yep. Nope. Just trade the corporate corruption for government corruption and agendas. Plus the government will outsource treatment just like it does today. So the health industry will purposely ensure the care is minimal at best to encourage people to pay for health insurance at private facilities. Highly likely the same companies providing the government paid care will also provide the privately paid care.

For one thing, items that are currently tax credits such as energy efficient house upgrades, electric vehicles, etc. could now be "penalties" for not having them. Do you have health insurance? If no your tax rate increases 1%. Do you own a car? If yes, is it electric? If no your tax rate rises x%. (Assuming here that people who don't own cars at all would not be penalized for not owning an electric car.) Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Sorry, but today's SCOTUS ruling dealt that one a death blow. ACA is Constitutional. As a TAX and not a commerce clause mandate...and the states can't be penalized for ignoring it. What is the mechanism for collecting the fine? It sounded like it was collected via federal taxes. If so, the state isn't the one liable for paying, it's the individual. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Most of the banks will be deemed "too big to fail" and will get bailed out by their government , possibly in exchange for partial or total control and the upper echelon of those banks will profit huge. After all, it's worked in the US for years. And the dance will go on... Either that or China will just buy Europe... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

I don't think anyone can argue that we don't need imigration reform, but ignoring enforcing our existing laws is not the answer as it sets a dangerous legal precedent where certain laws are only enforced selectively. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

A moat filled with your homebrew.. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

True capitalism regulates itself. Current regulations restrict businesses with one hand but insulate with the other. Hence the shell game we have now: "We'll take your risk, but you can't do..."And you must do...." Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Yep, and McCain and others tried to regulate it and Frank and others said there was no issue. Again yes, greed at buying more house than you could afford. Greed at using your home as an ATM. Greed at bankers trying to make money. Greed at politicians trying to win votes. Yes, greed ALL around. Not just Republicans. Once you understand that, we may actually get somewhere. While greed was the root cause, for the bankers it was greed without risk, guaranteed self destruction. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

I don't think any private business that chose not to do business with straight white people would cause a race war. There are already tons of businesses and orgs that state right in their name they don't represent them. The only backlash I could see would be if they were getting government funding or had government contracts, but that wouldn't be a riot.

I'll bite. How much does this process cost per gallon? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. The alternative is supporting/encouraging people who can't support the children they have, to have more. Won't hold up to court scrutiny, so pretty pointless to argue about here. It's more constitutional than Obamacare... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

once you start applying this sort of financial coercion, it's not free will anymore, and that slope gets slippery real fast. It goes the other way too. Once you start financially assisting someone and maintain or even increase assistance when they make more bad decisions... It's all about balance.

Unbelievable. Forced sterilization was done in the past and was deemed repulsive to the Nth degree. Maybe we HAVE totally lost it. It's not forced, it's conditional. Those who don't want to be sterilized just don't get further government aid. The alternative is supporting/encouraging people who can't support the children they have, to have more. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

This is not a question of personal freedoms, but abuse of a government support system. Allowing someone to do something vs. supporting their actions are two totally different things? If one wants to have large numbers of children with multiple partners, have at it. Just don't expect government assistance. I like the idea proposed above of reversible sterilization for anyone on government assistance based on a time on assistance and/or number of children criteria. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Agree 100%.. Condoms only exist for 2 reasons: 1 - preventing the man from spreading his inferior genes 2 - preventing the man from spreading his diseases Either way, I am in no way inclined to deliberately remove it in the manner you describe!!! Im in agreement with the rest of the girls here. Apparently the ladies are all together on this one. I will admit that I am now curious to see if I could, but would never try b/c it defeats the point of using the condom. Iif the condom wasnt necessary for the two functions mentioned above, I might try it... But if its not necessary, I wouldnt be using one, so it seems silly to put one on just to take it off... Could always double bag... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

they were ok with hiring these people, and apparently with their performance. There's probably a saner method to implement this loyalty oath that doesn't require instant completion. Given a 5 year grace period, the attrition rate would be high, but institutional knowledge would be maintained. Instead they have to recreate from scratch. And if they do lose their accreditation, they will see a tremendous drop in applicants, and have screwed their current students. (Kallend - is there any grace period or grandfathering for existing students in this sort of situation, or are they now getting an even more worthless degree?) Funny side note - I'm now seeing banner ads for Shorter on the top of DZ. Don't have any legal issues with this as not government funded or supported. This killing their college is the best thing that could happen as that would mean this sort of intolerance is no longer acceptable,. From reading how this college came under and fought religious control, that may be the intention. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Are Perris and Elsinore allowing turns greater than 90 period such as on a low/separate pass? Edited to add: Did not know that Eloy allowed turns greater than 90 period, regardless of landing area. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

You really like to spin everything don't you. If the state has events (Like high school football, baseball and soccer) they should be paying for that. Many things that the state would sponser would be held there. the team is binging in millions of dollars in tax revenue that will help the state. the states have the right to do things the fed should never get involved in, that is how this country was formed. The state would be seriously hurt if the team moved away, they are investing in the future of the state. The federal government isn't the only ones in huge debt from bad deals, many states and localities are too. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Agree with all. Only would add that any deals made have to pay for themselves immediately, not deferred. Seen too many times a company move in for tax breaks and around the time they expire threaten to leave unless given an extension or in some cases additional items. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Stadium is already there. Are you advocating that municipalities do not maintain and improve buildings and structures they own? You are starting to grasp at straws. If the stadium is already there what is the roughly $500 million being spent on in this case? As for the loss in tax revenue from illegal labor, they will get 0 income tax if the workers are paid in cash. Sure, go ahead and factor in their other taxes but it's not likely to make much difference either way towards justifying $500 million.

Except now you have to spend a billion. In this case you are spending less than half of that, yet still getting the larger investment in your community. It's not an either or. Road maintenance is a necessary and core expense. A stadium is not. Additionally, some of the jobs created by the stadium may not produce any tax revenue as they may use illegal labor: construction, maintenance, concessions, security, etc. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Yawn... I've seen more shoddy pattern flying by the old time instructors doing 90's or "straight" in approaches then I typically see with disciplined canopy pilots. What I saw at Perris in February in the main landing area was incredibly undisciplined. "S" turns on final are tolerated and its unacceptable. The quicker we figure out that this canopy issues is an "US" problem and not a "THEM" problem...the better off we will all be. Get off your high horse and offer a solution that doesn't start with Ban them! Additionally anyone that thinks the USPA will be released from any sort of responsibility in the eyes of the government of swoop deaths/injuries if it pushes out swooping to swooping dedicated Non USPA DZs is also fooling themselves. Well it worked with BASE BASE doesn't use airplanes. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Yawn... I've seen more shoddy pattern flying by the old time instructors doing 90's or "straight" in approaches then I typically see with disciplined canopy pilots. What I saw at Perris in February in the main landing area was incredibly undisciplined. "S" turns on final are tolerated and its unacceptable. The quicker we figure out that this canopy issues is an "US" problem and not a "THEM" problem...the better off we will all be. Get off your high horse and offer a solution that doesn't start with Ban them! Additionally anyone that thinks the USPA will be released from any sort of responsibility in the eyes of the government of swoop deaths/injuries if it pushes out swooping to swooping dedicated Non USPA DZs is also fooling themselves. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.