Why oh why do we have to follow a law when the lawmakers don't?

[bripat9643]

What law aren't they following?

You really are stupid, aren't you?

You are totally unaware of just about everything that goes in the world of politics, aren't you?

Are you so incredible stupid and brain dead to be unaware of a bill being introduced in Congress to require Congressmen and women to abide by the same laws they rrequire everyone else to abid by?

Are you really THAT stupid? Seriously?

Here's just one -- Insider Trading.

You are an ignorant person.

And stupid.

You didn't answer my question. What law aren't they following?

Obama isn't following the ACA, Nimrod


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Oldstyle]

Why oh why do we have to follow a law when the lawmakers don't?

Why do the lawmakers get a waiver for the most controversial law on the books, but we, the men on the street, have to follow it, paying more while they carry on with no repercussions?

Why are we standing for this? Democrats and Republicans should be standing together on this....Stop those waivers! If this ACA is good enough for us, then it is good enough for ALL government workers including Congressmen, aides, the president and all government workers.

The problem is actually much broader than this. The question ought to be "Why doesn't everyone have to follow the same rules?"

The whole point of rule of law is that everyone has the same rights and follows the same laws. There are no privileged classes, no nobility, no special interest groups who are exempt from the law.

We're making a radical and fundamental break from that principle and we need to wake up. We're creating a bureaucratic regulatory regime that parses out perks to those it favors and levies targeted penalties to its enemies. Under this new approach, everybody gets a different deal depending on which interest group they belong to and how much political influence they wield. Equal rights and equal protection are being swept away in favor of special privilege.

Some folks here need to read Orwell's "Animal Farm". It's happening here before our very eyes. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

That's the problem with government taking control of the people. It's almost a given that the people running government will start giving themselves special perks. Why? Because that's human nature. Monarchs do it. Dictators do it. Our government leaders do it. Which is one more good reason for term limits.

 

[Oldstyle]

You didn't answer my question. What law aren't they following?

Stop being a simple-minded, quibbling little ***** and look it up for yourself.

I already gave you one.... Insider trading. They stopped it, and then they quietly allowed it again.

They are also exempted from obeying the Whistle Blower laws and from retaliation against employees who report health and safety violations.

Why don't you just go away and re-read your "Fun With Dick and Jane" kindergarten book some more.

Stupid little *****.

You're just trying to shit on the thread.

I hate dimocraps. scumbags Every one of them.

Can;t have a serious discussion with them around

Wait, I thought this thread was about the Affordable Care Act?

When did it become about Insider trading?

Oh I get it, you didn't know what law they weren't following when it comes to the ACA so you changed the topic.

Got it.

I believe the "point" that was being made is that this if simply one more example of a law that ordinary Americans will have to comply with while members of the government do not. What you seem unaware of is that Congress exempted themselves from "insider trading laws". They can take advantage of their knowledge of impending legislation to buy or sell stocks...something which would result in an arrest and huge fines if an ordinary American did the same thing.

 

[Redfish]

Stop being a simple-minded, quibbling little ***** and look it up for yourself.

I already gave you one.... Insider trading. They stopped it, and then they quietly allowed it again.

They are also exempted from obeying the Whistle Blower laws and from retaliation against employees who report health and safety violations.

Why don't you just go away and re-read your "Fun With Dick and Jane" kindergarten book some more.

Stupid little *****.

You're just trying to shit on the thread.

I hate dimocraps. scumbags Every one of them.

Can;t have a serious discussion with them around

Wait, I thought this thread was about the Affordable Care Act?

When did it become about Insider trading?

Oh I get it, you didn't know what law they weren't following when it comes to the ACA so you changed the topic.

Got it.

I believe the "point" that was being made is that this if simply one more example of a law that ordinary Americans will have to comply with while members of the government do not. What you seem unaware of is that Congress exempted themselves from "insider trading laws". They can take advantage of their knowledge of impending legislation to buy or sell stocks...something which would result in an arrest and huge fines if an ordinary American did the same thing.

ask Martha Stewart

 

[RDD_1210]

No RDD, he said superbly. Our country was based on equality and everyone being treated the same. No privileged class. But with Obamacare, they are seeing to it, that they are being privileged.

Not only do they make the laws, they see to it that they benefit from those same laws and are treated differently that the people they represent.

Who specifically is not being treated the same under the ACA?

Congress, the senate, the administration, and their staffs are having their ACA premiums subsidized by the taxpayers. Why would any citizen condone that? Effectively they have voted themselves exempt from the financial affects of the ACA law.

So their employer subsidizes a portion of the cost of their healthcare premiums and you somehow think that makes them different that other americans whose employers also subsidize the cost of their health insurance.

There is NOTHING being violated except for the way you idiots violate the use of common sense.

 

[RDD_1210]

You really are stupid, aren't you?

You are totally unaware of just about everything that goes in the world of politics, aren't you?

Are you so incredible stupid and brain dead to be unaware of a bill being introduced in Congress to require Congressmen and women to abide by the same laws they rrequire everyone else to abid by?

Are you really THAT stupid? Seriously?

Here's just one -- Insider Trading.

You are an ignorant person.

And stupid.

You didn't answer my question. What law aren't they following?

Obama isn't following the ACA, Nimrod


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obama doesn't have health insurance?

Weird, I hadn't heard about that before. Where can I read more about Obama going without health insurance?

 

[RDD_1210]

Stop being a simple-minded, quibbling little ***** and look it up for yourself.

I already gave you one.... Insider trading. They stopped it, and then they quietly allowed it again.

They are also exempted from obeying the Whistle Blower laws and from retaliation against employees who report health and safety violations.

Why don't you just go away and re-read your "Fun With Dick and Jane" kindergarten book some more.

Stupid little *****.

You're just trying to shit on the thread.

I hate dimocraps. scumbags Every one of them.

Can;t have a serious discussion with them around

Wait, I thought this thread was about the Affordable Care Act?

When did it become about Insider trading?

Oh I get it, you didn't know what law they weren't following when it comes to the ACA so you changed the topic.

Got it.

I believe the "point" that was being made is that this if simply one more example of a law that ordinary Americans will have to comply with while members of the government do not. What you seem unaware of is that Congress exempted themselves from "insider trading laws". They can take advantage of their knowledge of impending legislation to buy or sell stocks...something which would result in an arrest and huge fines if an ordinary American did the same thing.

But congress isn't exempt from anything having to do with the ACA. THAT is the point that you loons can't seem to grasp.

 

[Claudette]

I have news for you.... Taxpayers will be paying for everyone enrolled in the ACA.

Who do you know that has a $13,999.00 deductible?

A friend of a guy I work with.

His monthly is $569 and his deductable is $13,999.00. He almost fell out of his chair. Hell. I almost fell outta my ******* chair and I don't know the guy.

One of the other guys I work with has a deductable for he and his wife. His deductable would be $11,000.

A lady I spoke with at Wal-Mart had a deductable of $12,0000.

Gotta wonder just who the hell the Affordable care act is affordable for.

That's hard to believe.

Well Troy, one of the Deputies I work with, is standing right behind me as I type.

Troy say its a fact. He put in what he and his wife make just to see what it would cost him.

It was $729 a month with that pesky $11,000 dollar deductable.

This thing is going to sink itself. What a POS.

 

[Claudette]

Wait, I thought this thread was about the Affordable Care Act?

When did it become about Insider trading?

Oh I get it, you didn't know what law they weren't following when it comes to the ACA so you changed the topic.

Got it.

I believe the "point" that was being made is that this if simply one more example of a law that ordinary Americans will have to comply with while members of the government do not. What you seem unaware of is that Congress exempted themselves from "insider trading laws". They can take advantage of their knowledge of impending legislation to buy or sell stocks...something which would result in an arrest and huge fines if an ordinary American did the same thing.

But congress isn't exempt from anything having to do with the ACA. THAT is the point that you loons can't seem to grasp.

Your right. They have to use the ACA just like we do. They are also subsidized by we the taxpayer anywhere from 72% to 75%. Wonder how much they actually pay for their HC??

 

[RDD_1210]

I believe the "point" that was being made is that this if simply one more example of a law that ordinary Americans will have to comply with while members of the government do not. What you seem unaware of is that Congress exempted themselves from "insider trading laws". They can take advantage of their knowledge of impending legislation to buy or sell stocks...something which would result in an arrest and huge fines if an ordinary American did the same thing.

But congress isn't exempt from anything having to do with the ACA. THAT is the point that you loons can't seem to grasp.

Your right. They have to use the ACA just like we do. They are also subsidized by we the taxpayer anywhere from 72% to 75%. Wonder how much they actually pay for their HC??

Your employer doesn't subsidize part of the cost of your health insurance premium?

 

[Claudette]

A friend of a guy I work with.

His monthly is $569 and his deductable is $13,999.00. He almost fell out of his chair. Hell. I almost fell outta my ******* chair and I don't know the guy.

One of the other guys I work with has a deductable for he and his wife. His deductable would be $11,000.

A lady I spoke with at Wal-Mart had a deductable of $12,0000.

Gotta wonder just who the hell the Affordable care act is affordable for.

That's hard to believe.

That's probably because it isn't true.

From Troy. Its Oh So True. He got his cost and deductable. Put yours in and see what you get.

Unless your being subsidized by the rest of us your totals should be right up there with his.

 

[Claudette]

But congress isn't exempt from anything having to do with the ACA. THAT is the point that you loons can't seem to grasp.

Your right. They have to use the ACA just like we do. They are also subsidized by we the taxpayer anywhere from 72% to 75%. Wonder how much they actually pay for their HC??

Your employer doesn't subsidize part of the cost of your health insurance premium?

I'm sure its not 72% to 75% of the cost. How bout you??

 

[RDD_1210]

Your right. They have to use the ACA just like we do. They are also subsidized by we the taxpayer anywhere from 72% to 75%. Wonder how much they actually pay for their HC??

Your employer doesn't subsidize part of the cost of your health insurance premium?

I'm sure its not 72% to 75% of the cost. How bout you??

Yup, they sure do. A good chunk of it. I'd have to do the math but it's right around the 75% mark.

But to your point, your employer subsidizes part of the cost of your health insurance premiums, why shouldn't lawmakers be able to have the same benefit? If you want to argue that it's too big of a %, then tell me what % you think it should be.

 

[RDD_1210]

That's hard to believe.

That's probably because it isn't true.

From Troy. Its Oh So True. He got his cost and deductable. Put yours in and see what you get.

Unless your being subsidized by the rest of us your totals should be right up there with his.

I can believe $11k for two people for a high deductible plan. I don't believe $13k + for a single person.

 

[Claudette]

Well Bobs friend ran it three times just because HE didn't believe what he was getting.

Troy said the one he put in was a Silver plan for $11,000.

He also tried it at $1,000 a month and still had a $10,000 dollar deductable.

Check this out:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...are-overhaul-health-insurance-health-coverage

 

[Rinata]

Why oh why do we have to follow a law when the lawmakers don't?

Why do the lawmakers get a waiver for the most controversial law on the books, but we, the men on the street, have to follow it, paying more while they carry on with no repercussions?

Why are we standing for this? Democrats and Republicans should be standing together on this....Stop those waivers! If this ACA is good enough for us, then it is good enough for ALL government workers including Congressmen, aides, the president and all government workers.

As a result of an amendment offered by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the Affordable Care Act includes a provision that would require members of Congress (and their personal staffs) to get their insurance on the Obamacare exchanges. The Heritage Foundation has released a very interesting paper that details the legislative history of this provision, and how efforts to adjust it (including by Grassley) slipped away before final passage.

The exchanges are intended for people who currently do not get employer-provided insurance, whereas lawmakers and their staffs previously had about 70 percent of their insurance premiums underwritten by the federal government through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. For lawmakers and their staffs, the loss of employer contributions would have amounted to an unintended pay cut of between $5,000 to $10,000.

The exchanges were not intended for people already with employer-provided insurance. So it’s already a rather unusual situation. Costs have been imposed on lawmakers and their staffs that did not previously exist, and OPM’s rule appears intended to solve that problem — instead of “exempting” them from the health care law.

Under pressure from Congress, the Office of Personnel Management proposed a rule in August, which was finalized in September, saying the federal government could still contribute to health-care premiums.

The issue concerning Congress is complex, but the bottom line is that the administration’s action was intended to reduce an unintended burden, not carve out an exception. Rep. Scalise would have been on stronger ground if he had claimed that Congress got special treatment, rather than suggesting that lawmakers and their staffs were not covered by the health care law.

So Congress is not exempt from the ACA

Did Obama exempt 1,200 groups, including Congress, from Obamacare?

 

[Sunshine]

The ACA was deemed to be legal by the SCOTUS because it is a TAX. That's right, it is a TAX on poor working people, and middle class people whose companies change their business model and dump their health care plans. The libs on here defend it because it is Obama's baby. But no corporate attorney could have done better. This definitely favors business and not the TAXpayer. And surprise, surprise, you pay this tax and you get nothing until you are out thousands of dollars that you already are paying anyway if you pay for your own medical care.

 

[dblack]

the aca was deemed to be legal by the scotus because it is a tax. That's right, it is a tax on poor working people, and middle class people whose companies change their business model and dump their health care plans. The libs on here defend it because it is obama's baby. But no corporate attorney could have done better. This definitely favors business and not the taxpayer. And surprise, surprise, you pay this tax and you get nothing until you are out thousands of dollars that you already are paying anyway if you pay for your own medical care.

qft

 

[Oldstyle]

Why oh why do we have to follow a law when the lawmakers don't?

Why do the lawmakers get a waiver for the most controversial law on the books, but we, the men on the street, have to follow it, paying more while they carry on with no repercussions?

Why are we standing for this? Democrats and Republicans should be standing together on this....Stop those waivers! If this ACA is good enough for us, then it is good enough for ALL government workers including Congressmen, aides, the president and all government workers.

As a result of an amendment offered by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), the Affordable Care Act includes a provision that would require members of Congress (and their personal staffs) to get their insurance on the Obamacare exchanges. The Heritage Foundation has released a very interesting paper that details the legislative history of this provision, and how efforts to adjust it (including by Grassley) slipped away before final passage.

The exchanges are intended for people who currently do not get employer-provided insurance, whereas lawmakers and their staffs previously had about 70 percent of their insurance premiums underwritten by the federal government through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. For lawmakers and their staffs, the loss of employer contributions would have amounted to an unintended pay cut of between $5,000 to $10,000.

The exchanges were not intended for people already with employer-provided insurance. So it’s already a rather unusual situation. Costs have been imposed on lawmakers and their staffs that did not previously exist, and OPM’s rule appears intended to solve that problem — instead of “exempting” them from the health care law.

Under pressure from Congress, the Office of Personnel Management proposed a rule in August, which was finalized in September, saying the federal government could still contribute to health-care premiums.

The issue concerning Congress is complex, but the bottom line is that the administration’s action was intended to reduce an unintended burden, not carve out an exception. Rep. Scalise would have been on stronger ground if he had claimed that Congress got special treatment, rather than suggesting that lawmakers and their staffs were not covered by the health care law.

So Congress is not exempt from the ACA

Did Obama exempt 1,200 groups, including Congress, from Obamacare?

You are in fact correct. I don't believe however that it was the Congress that made the OPM rule that the Federal government could contribute to health care premiums. If memory serves that was something that President Obama pushed for while Congress was away on their summer vacation.

My biggest problem with Congress isn't whether they are exempt from the ACA because let's face it...if the taxpayers are picking up most of the "cost" then what does it matter to them one way or the other? Congress and those that work for Congress are insulated from the high cost of the ACA to people in the middle and upper classes because it's the taxpayer that ultimately foots most of the bill for any increases to their premiums. Those of us in the private sector unfortunately don't have that luxury. At this point it's clear that if you are not poor or didn't have a pre-existing condition then the ACA will cause your premiums to increase and you will be eating that increase.

 

[RDD_1210]

The ACA was deemed to be legal by the SCOTUS because it is a TAX. That's right, it is a TAX on poor working people, and middle class people whose companies change their business model and dump their health care plans. The libs on here defend it because it is Obama's baby. But no corporate attorney could have done better. This definitely favors business and not the TAXpayer. And surprise, surprise, you pay this tax and you get nothing until you are out thousands of dollars that you already are paying anyway if you pay for your own medical care.

It's only a tax on irresponsible people such as yourself who choose to not purchase health insurance and decide to gamble with my money and those who do choose to purchase health insurance.

I'm sorry you don't like to take personal responsibility but it's about time you did.