First Person Killed By Obamacare Death Panel

[lulz]

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[emilynghiem]

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

Obamacare Death Panel Orders First Execution - The Daily Currant
First execution under Obamacare death panels Pants on Fire PolitiFact
snopes.com Elderly Patient Executed by Obamacare Death Panels

 

[Bfgrn]

It turns out that the story is ripped from an article posted on The Daily Currant in January. The Daily Currant is a satirical website with a mission "to ridicule the timid ignorance which obstructs our progress and promote intelligence," according to the website. Other headlines include things like "Obama Announces Two-Year Golfing Trip" and "Al-Qaeda Member Elected to California City Council." The debunkers at Snopes.com caught this case of copying back in September.

sat·ire
ˈsaˌtī(ə)r/
noun
noun: satire
the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
synonyms: mockery, ridicule, derision, scorn, caricature;

 

[Nutz]

Teapers will believe anything if they are told to.

 

[emilynghiem]

Thanks, I added the snopes link to the list so this is clear these are all bogus.

I offered to go on hunger strike if the ACA mandates and regulations aren't declared optional/voluntary for citizens to participate in and fund. So I could be the first casualty to Obamacare if this isn't resolved by the end of the year.

The other option I could pursue is that if all the opponents lobby for a condition to be added in order to agree to this,
such as compelling all participants to go through spiritual healing to heal any cureable disease, addiction, criminal
or mental illness or even unnatural orientation before the prolife groups agree to this ACA. if the left can mandate
rules that everyone has to follow or be fined, then the right should be able to include all their beliefs equally as the left.

 

[emilynghiem]

Teapers will believe anything if they are told to.

I found out people will believe anything they are told about Obamacare.
A groups of guys I argued with for hours
thought the fine was only 95.00 because that's what they were told.

they thought the objections to ACA were only based on race, because that's what they were told.
So I showed them how expensive the fines were, and explained why so many people were protesting
this huge added tax that people cannot afford to pay who are trying to pay for immediate needs first.

 

[Nutz]

What is the fine this year $265?

 

[emilynghiem]

What is the fine this year $265?

first year it is 1% of your income over 10K or 95.00 whichever is higher
second year rises to 2 per cent, and adding another 1 percent increase each year after that

Fees exemptions HealthCare.gov

they didn't see the HIGHER part, so they heard the rumor it was just 95.00
One guy didn't even know why his tax return was reduced to 900 when it used to be over 2000

 

[Nutz]

What is the fine this year $265?

first year it is 1% of your income over 10K or 95.00 whichever is higher
second year rises to 2 per cent, and adding another 1 percent increase each year after that

Fees exemptions HealthCare.gov

they didn't see the HIGHER part, so they heard the rumor it was just 95.00
One guy didn't even know why his tax return was reduced to 900 when it used to be over 2000

That doesn't make sense. This guy makes $100,000 a year and doesn't have health insurance? Wait, this is year 2...he makes 200k and no insurance?

 

[emilynghiem]

What is the fine this year $265?

first year it is 1% of your income over 10K or 95.00 whichever is higher
second year rises to 2 per cent, and adding another 1 percent increase each year after that

Fees exemptions HealthCare.gov

they didn't see the HIGHER part, so they heard the rumor it was just 95.00
One guy didn't even know why his tax return was reduced to 900 when it used to be over 2000

That doesn't make sense. This guy makes $100,000 a year and doesn't have health insurance? Wait, this is year 2...he makes 200k and no insurance?

No, they also take out any subsidies that people used to get
there were other changes to the tax code
but they don't advertise that part

they waited until after the midterm elections
and now waiting until after Obama leaves office to save face

it is all symbolic, but the costs of it aren't workable
people who can't afford health care can't afford these costs either

instead of propaganda and rumors for or against how it worked,
it should have been proven first and remained optional to choose
clearly federal govt isn't designed to micromanage choices
as sensitive personal and diverse as health care. this should have
been done like any other business plan, start off small get it working locally
before going globally with it. but they tried to push it from the top down to make a political statement.

 

[Nutz]

YOu are going to have to spell out how there is an $1100 difference. I haven't heard of anyone loses more than 50% of their tax return because of ACA. Sounds like a teaper myth to me.

I don't like ACA...but the hyperbole and nonsense from the teapers is what makes people ignore true facts.

 

[emilynghiem]

YOu are going to have to spell out how there is an $1100 difference. I haven't heard of anyone loses more than 50% of their tax return because of ACA. Sounds like a teaper myth to me.

I don't like ACA...but the hyperbole and nonsense from the teapers is what makes people ignore true facts.

this guy is like you, arguing that the ACA is the law of the land
and the Tea Party are Klan (specifically he said 72 percent Klan and 28 percent fruitcake).
I made a 10 million dollar bet with him the Tea Party
were about the Constitution not the Klan. He upped it to 20 million that I agreed to help him raise
for a nonprofit foundation publicized as part of this bet. I didn't want to take advantage.

he said he didn't mind paying the extra in taxes since that is the law.
I said that is if you CHOOSE to comply because it aligns with your beliefs, which is true for him.
for those who don't believe in this, the govt cannot make you change your beliefs or
penalize/discriminate against you for them. if you CHOOSE to go with the law for convenience, like an atheist putting up with God on money or in a pledge or a cross on public property then it is acceptable, but if they don't agree it is unlawful for govt to require due to the Constitution.

they didn't think there could be any Constitutional issues left to argue since it already went through Congress and Courts. so I had to explain the difference between state and federal laws, and why people blieve this is a matter for state law not Congress.

 

[strollingbones]

i think we should go back to private insurance deciding who dies....seems yall have forgotten the refusals of payment for treatments they dont deem necessary etc and so forth...funny how quickly yall have forgotten death panels by for profit insurance companies....

 

[S.J.]

A trial balloon. Eventually the death panels will operate openly and proudly (IF the Democrats hold onto the executive branch and win back control of Congress). We're getting closer and closer to 1984.

 

[Nutz]

YOu are going to have to spell out how there is an $1100 difference. I haven't heard of anyone loses more than 50% of their tax return because of ACA. Sounds like a teaper myth to me.

I don't like ACA...but the hyperbole and nonsense from the teapers is what makes people ignore true facts.

this guy is like you, arguing that the ACA is the law of the land
and the Tea Party are Klan (specifically he said 72 percent Klan and 28 percent fruitcake).
I made a 10 million dollar bet with him the Tea Party
were about the Constitution not the Klan. He upped it to 20 million that I agreed to help him raise
for a nonprofit foundation publicized as part of this bet. I didn't want to take advantage.

he said he didn't mind paying the extra in taxes since that is the law.
I said that is if you CHOOSE to comply because it aligns with your beliefs, which is true for him.
for those who don't believe in this, the govt cannot make you change your beliefs or
penalize/discriminate against you for them. if you CHOOSE to go with the law for convenience, like an atheist putting up with God on money or in a pledge or a cross on public property then it is acceptable, but if they don't agree it is unlawful for govt to require due to the Constitution.

they didn't think there could be any Constitutional issues left to argue since it already went through Congress and Courts. so I had to explain the difference between state and federal laws, and why people blieve this is a matter for state law not Congress.

My question was simple..how do you explain a more than 50% reduction in this guys tax return? Given your numbers...he made over $200,000 last year. Show me how it is ACA that is responsible for this.

 

[emilynghiem]

YOu are going to have to spell out how there is an $1100 difference. I haven't heard of anyone loses more than 50% of their tax return because of ACA. Sounds like a teaper myth to me.

I don't like ACA...but the hyperbole and nonsense from the teapers is what makes people ignore true facts.

this guy is like you, arguing that the ACA is the law of the land
and the Tea Party are Klan (specifically he said 72 percent Klan and 28 percent fruitcake).
I made a 10 million dollar bet with him the Tea Party
were about the Constitution not the Klan. He upped it to 20 million that I agreed to help him raise
for a nonprofit foundation publicized as part of this bet. I didn't want to take advantage.

he said he didn't mind paying the extra in taxes since that is the law.
I said that is if you CHOOSE to comply because it aligns with your beliefs, which is true for him.
for those who don't believe in this, the govt cannot make you change your beliefs or
penalize/discriminate against you for them. if you CHOOSE to go with the law for convenience, like an atheist putting up with God on money or in a pledge or a cross on public property then it is acceptable, but if they don't agree it is unlawful for govt to require due to the Constitution.

they didn't think there could be any Constitutional issues left to argue since it already went through Congress and Courts. so I had to explain the difference between state and federal laws, and why people blieve this is a matter for state law not Congress.

My question was simple..how do you explain a more than 50% reduction in this guys tax return? Given your numbers...he made over $200,000 last year. Show me how it is ACA that is responsible for this.

Hey this guy is on your side. And no this is NOT based on the 1% or 2% fine or whatever.
I stated above that some SUBSIDIES GET DEDUCTED FROM RETURNS DUE TO changes in tax law that also went through the same time as Obamacare.

I have no idea what he makes, but since this is private I can ask him to contact you and
discuss in private. Since you believe the same thing he does about the Tea Party, he might
want to share information with you. he wants to show me that the Tea Party is 72% Klan
so if you can help him prove those numbers (including the Latino Tea Parties, the Black Tea Parties,
the Muslim Tea Party, and all the other Tea Party members included in the full population),
then sure, he may be willing to explain where the numbers came from.

My guess is that some subsidies he used to get didn't get credited back.
and yes supposedly that is from Obamacare changing the tax code, but
it would take some tax expert to verify where that change came from.

He doesn't make that much, but he got a lot of overtime, and I don't know the laws on overtime.
I think he would be happy to share info with you, especially if you can help him prove this
idea that the Tea party is 72% Klan.

So please don't call someone like him a liar when he is in support of ACA, wants to pay under that
system and thinks like you do that the Tea Party isn't Constitutional but Klan. This guy is your
ally not your enemy.

Yours truly,
Emily

Here s How Obamacare Is Going To Affect Your Taxes
Recipients of Obamacare Subsidies Could Face Tax Surprise - US News

 

[Nutz]

YOu are going to have to spell out how there is an $1100 difference. I haven't heard of anyone loses more than 50% of their tax return because of ACA. Sounds like a teaper myth to me.

I don't like ACA...but the hyperbole and nonsense from the teapers is what makes people ignore true facts.

this guy is like you, arguing that the ACA is the law of the land
and the Tea Party are Klan (specifically he said 72 percent Klan and 28 percent fruitcake).
I made a 10 million dollar bet with him the Tea Party
were about the Constitution not the Klan. He upped it to 20 million that I agreed to help him raise
for a nonprofit foundation publicized as part of this bet. I didn't want to take advantage.

he said he didn't mind paying the extra in taxes since that is the law.
I said that is if you CHOOSE to comply because it aligns with your beliefs, which is true for him.
for those who don't believe in this, the govt cannot make you change your beliefs or
penalize/discriminate against you for them. if you CHOOSE to go with the law for convenience, like an atheist putting up with God on money or in a pledge or a cross on public property then it is acceptable, but if they don't agree it is unlawful for govt to require due to the Constitution.

they didn't think there could be any Constitutional issues left to argue since it already went through Congress and Courts. so I had to explain the difference between state and federal laws, and why people blieve this is a matter for state law not Congress.

My question was simple..how do you explain a more than 50% reduction in this guys tax return? Given your numbers...he made over $200,000 last year. Show me how it is ACA that is responsible for this.

Hey this guy is on your side. And no this is NOT based on the 1% or 2% fine or whatever.
I stated above that some SUBSIDIES GET CANCELLED DUE TO changes in tax law
that also went through the same time as Obamacare.

I have no idea what he makes, but since this is private I can ask him to contact you and
discuss in private. Since you believe the same thing he does about the Tea Party, he might
want to share information with you. he wants to show me that the Tea Party is 72% Klan
so if you can help him prove those numbers (including the Latino Tea Parties, the Black Tea Parties,
the Muslim Tea Party, and all the other Tea Party members included in the full population),
then sure, he may be willing to explain where the numbers came from.

My guess is that some subsidies he used to get didn't get credited back.
and yes supposedly that is from Obamacare changing the tax code, but
it would take some tax expert to verify where that change came from.

He doesn't make that much, but he got a lot of overtime, and I don't know the laws on overtime.
I think he would be happy to share info with you, especially if you can help him prove this
idea that the Tea party is 72% Klan.

So please don't call someone like him a liar when he is in support of ACA, wants to pay under that
system and thinks like you do that the Tea Party isn't Constitutional but Klan. This guy is your
ally not your enemy.

Yours truly,
Emily

You seem to be attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I DO NOT support ACA...but I am also a rational and thinkning human being who doesn't buy TEAPER hyperbole and hysteria that is solely based on the hate of a President of a darker hue.

YOU attributed a 50% reduction in his refund to ACA...I simply asked why?
YOU suggested this guy makes 200K/ yr because of YOUR numbers.

YOU are misrepresenting the fine and cost of ACA. It is a propaganda move that is NOT based on FACT but personal OPINION. It is HYPERBOLE at is best in order to create HYSTERIA among anyone willing to believe UNSUBSTANTIATED fact.

 

[emilynghiem]

i think we should go back to private insurance deciding who dies....seems yall have forgotten the refusals of payment for treatments they dont deem necessary etc and so forth...funny how quickly yall have forgotten death panels by for profit insurance companies....

I think we should let the political parties work out programs for their members.
so you set up the system you trust to handle YOUR financial and health decisions
and let others do the same.

But if one group trusts the federal govt and the other doesn't, that can't be forced on them to "change their beliefs."
Not any more than if the other group trust the church and nonprofit groups with health care;
they can use that for themselves but can't force their way on you either!

You act like govt is the only way to to fix this.
But all this time we've had people getting health care through nonprofits, through businesses,
through medical schools, church groups, etc.

It doesn't only have to be through federally mandated insurance.
This is stepping on people's beliefs who don't even believe govt has that authority in the first place.
So of course, they've come up with other ways to handle health care if they don't believe it is the job of federal govt.

What ever happened to free choice?

 

[emilynghiem]

1, Here is where I answered your question the first time
that there were other SUBSIDIES that can get deducted from returns
due to tax changes that went through in conjunction with Obamacare:

"No, they also take out any subsidies that people used to get
there were other changes to the tax code
but they don't advertise that part

First Person Killed By Obamacare Death Panel US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

2. Here is where I restate it the SECOND time
(boldface added for emphasis):

First Person Killed By Obamacare Death Panel Page 2 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

3. but you can drop both arguments and not use this at all.
I prefer to stick with Constitutional arguments teaching people what a political belief
is, so we can start resolving these conflicts instead of pushing them through govt.

You seem to be attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I DO NOT support ACA...but I am also a rational and thinkning human being who doesn't buy TEAPER hyperbole and hysteria that is solely based on the hate of a President of a darker hue.

YOU attributed a 50% reduction in his refund to ACA...I simply asked why?
YOU suggested this guy makes 200K/ yr because of YOUR numbers.

YOU are misrepresenting the fine and cost of ACA. It is a propaganda move that is NOT based on FACT but personal OPINION. It is HYPERBOLE at is best in order to create HYSTERIA among anyone willing to believe UNSUBSTANTIATED fact.

Sorry. but I thought I said it clearly (and this is my THIRD TIME TO MENTION SUBSIDIES)
that in addition to the 1% or 2% fee,
if someone took any SUBSIDIES then this can also be deducted
and will cause an Additional Reduction in tax returns.

Nutz MY ARGUMENT is simply based on the Constitution as I stated in my other thread.

If you want to DROP the WHOLE ARGUMENT about the 1% 2% or subsidies

===> FINE! <===

I DON'T NEED TO ARGUE ABOUT DETAILS
TO PROVE THE ACA MANDATES ARE AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION ON THE BASIS OF BELIEF.

Nobody is REQUIRED to prove WHY they believe something in order to defend their free exercise in that belief.

So if you don't agree that SUBSIDIES being subtracted also contribute and these ALSO came from Obamacare, then I AGREE TO DROP THAT ISSUE ALTOGETHER.

And just stick with the Constitution.

Here, I will link my thread where I base my arguments on the Constitution
and show there are two different beliefs going on.

My arguments do not require anything else but acknowledge of political beliefs. That's enough to show that ACA mandates violate equal protections by discriminating on the basis of creed.

The other details are secondary and can be DROPPED and still make the Constitutional argument.

Since you don't agree, I agree to DROP those points that aren't necessary but just distracting.
Here I will link that thread:
10 million dollar ACA Bet May mean Goodbye...or Hello-oh US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[emilynghiem]

P.S. Nutz I see two places where we seem to be talking past each other

1. just because the guy LEARNED that the fine was MORE than 95.00 and was 1% or 2% of income,
and this explains why his return was lower, does NOT mean the WHOLE THING was based on 1%.
This was the first time anyone explained to him that it wasn't just 95.00 flat but a percentage.
And he recognized he had counted on the fine being lower, like 95.00 but it was higher.

2. just because I said this guy is on your side, what I mean is not believing in arguments
against the ACA but seeing this as propaganda because neither of you trusts the Tea Party.

If people have to prove to you their beliefs are true, before you respect their rights to their beliefs,
that is half the problem. (The other half is not requiring them to see proof that ACA works before
imposing those beliefs. Supporters think passing it makes it law, and there is no more contesting it.)

Since you are not coming at it from neutral, but believe Tea Party has other agenda besides
the Constitution (and this has to be proven to you before you believe it), this is one more level of argument or proof that stands in the way of uniting by the Constitution.

So on that part, you and he are on the same side that you both want to see proof first that the
Tea Party isn't a cover for racist Klan groups.