SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 1:27:29 AM
From: TopCat2 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
TideGlider

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574265
 
"Crock of shit. We have fewer insured today than we had when the fucking law was passed."

And low income people are now insured, subsidized by middle income people who have been priced out of the market and are now uninsured. Great program, Obama.



To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 11:34:33 AM
From: bentway  Respond to of 1574265
 
Fox Geezer Syndrome

January 30th, 2011 at 9:33 am RICHMOND RAMSEY | 188 Comments |
More Sharing Service

frumforum.com

Conor Friedersdorf remembers what a pain it was to live with a liberal roommate who watched Keith Olbermann every night, and would subsequently sulk around in a pissed-off mood. Friedersdorf too got a negative contact buzz from the show. He writes: “It seems to me that Olbermann’s show often brought out the worst impulses in people: petulance, self-righteousness, and blind anger at ‘the other side.’”

Sounds familiar to me, though from the other side. Except in my case, it’s not my liberal roommate. It’s my conservative parents – and maybe yours too.

Over the past couple of years, I’ve been keeping track of a trend among friends around my age (late thirties to mid-forties). Eight of us (so far) share something in common besides our conservatism: a deep frustration over how our parents have become impossible to take on the subject of politics. Without fail, it turns out that our folks have all been sitting at home watching Fox News Channel all day – especially Glenn Beck’s program.

Used to be I would call my mom and get updated on news from the neighborhood, her garden, the grandchildren, hometown gossip, and so forth. I’ve always been interested in politics, but never had the occasion to talk about them with her. She just doesn’t care.

Or didn’t. I don’t know when it happened, exactly, but she began peppering our conversation with red-hot remarks about President Obama. I would try to engage her, but unless I shared her particular judgment, and her outrage, she apparently thought that I was a dupe or a RINO. Finally I asked my father privately why Mom, who as far as I know never before had a political thought, was so worked up about Obama all the time.

“She’s been like that ever since she started watching Glenn Beck,” Dad said.

A few months later, she roped him into watching Beck, which had the same effect. Even though we’re all conservatives, I found myself having to steer our phone conversations away from politics and current events. It wasn’t that I disagreed with their opinions – though I often did – but rather that I found the vehemence with which they expressed those opinions to be so off-putting.

Then I flew out for a visit, and observed that their television was on all day long, even if no one was watching it. What channel was playing? Fox. Spending a few days in the company of the channel – especially Glenn Beck — it all became clear to me. If Fox was the window through which I saw the wider world, for hours every day, I’d be perpetually pissed off too.

Back home, I mentioned to a friend over beers how much Fox my mom and dad watched, and how angry they now were about politics.

“Yours too?!” he said. “I’ve noticed the same thing with mine. They weren’t always like this, but since they retired, they’ve gotten into Fox, and you can’t even talk to them anymore without hearing them read the riot act about Obama.”

I started to wonder how common this Fox Geezer Syndrome was. I began to poll conservative friends of my generation who had right-wing parents. At least eight different people – not an Obama voter among them, and one of them actually a George W. Bush political appointee in Washington – told me that yes, they had observed a correlation between the fevered emotionalism of their elderly parents’ politics, and increased exposure to Fox News.

After the Tucson shootings, Fox chief Roger Ailes said he had told his crew to “tone it down.” I’m skeptical, but I hope he succeeds. One of the great advantages of a conservative disposition is a suspicion of emotions, and emotionalism. The dumbest decisions I’ve ever made, about politics and everything else, were executed while I was worked up about something, and trusted my emotional response. Passion is inevitable – we are only human, after all – and can be constructive when properly channeled. But passion is the enemy of clear thought and, when given free reign, is the prerequisite for mob rule.

Unbridled anger at the deserving enemies is a danger to the civil order, and ultimately to ourselves. Remember Thomas More’s warning to the hotheaded William Roper in A Man For All Seasons, when Roper accused More of going easy on a scoundrel who hadn’t (yet) broken the law. Roper charged More with wanting to give the Devil the benefit of the law.

“This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s!” More responded. “And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?”

More adds that he would give the Devil the benefit of the law “for my own safety’s sake.” There’s a profound conservative truth in this, a warning that even passion for righteousness can be turned to evil, precisely because it is passion.

The popularity of vigorous rage merchants like Beck and Olbermann are not a sign of our political culture’s vitality, but rather its decadence. We live in a time and place that puts high value on emotion, and that views emotions as self-validating. To feel something is thought by many to be sufficient evidence of its truthfulness, or at least its authenticity. This is a mark of the barbarian. I understand why post-Sixties liberals make the mistake of believing that nonsense. But conservatives?

I love my own Fox Geezers, who are big-hearted, salt-of-the-earth folks when they’re not talking about politics. But they are living proof that growing older doesn’t always mean growing wiser.

Richmond Ramsey is the pseudonym of an executive who lives and works in Blue America.



To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 12:12:10 PM
From: bentway  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1574265
 
GOP struggles with Obamacare surge
Steve Benen
03/31/14 08:51 AM
msnbc.com

As much of the country has probably heard, today marks the end of the open-enrollment period in the Affordable Care Act, and consumers who don’t get coverage are likely to face a tax penalty. ACA proponents have long predicted there’d be an 11th-hour surge in folks signing up, and right now, those predictions are holding up nicely.

Indeed, the White House posted photos over the weekend of events in Nevada, Texas, and Florida, where Americans lined up at grassroots events to enroll in the system.

We can’t yet say with any confidence exactly how many will sign up before the deadlines, but for those hoping to see the federal program succeed, nearly all of the news is heartening. Enrollment through exchanges will likely get close to the 7 million threshold, and that won’t include Americans who’ve gained coverage through Medicaid, through their parents’ plans, or through direct enrollment that bypassed the exchanges.


All told, the L.A. Times reported this morning,
“[A]t least 9.5 million previously uninsured people have gained coverage”
– a number that keeps growing – as the rate of uninsured continues to drop.

Congressional Republicans, who are making no effort to hide the fact they’re rooting against the U.S. health care system, aren’t taking the news well.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) on Sunday dismissed the White House’s recent announcement that Obamacare enrollment had reached more than 6 million people, calling it a meaningless figure.

“I don’t think it means anything. … I think they’re cooking the books on this,” said Barrasso on “Fox News Sunday.”
Even by GOP standards, this was a rather extraordinary moment. A member of the Senate Republican leadership – indeed, the chair of the Senate Republican Policy Committee – went on national television to accuse the White House of perpetrating a fraud based on nothing but his own hopes.

It’s hard to overstate how difficult it is to take Barrasso’s complaints seriously. For one thing, note the extent to which the far-right senator wants to have it both ways. When enrollment totals were low, Barrasso said the figures were very important. When enrollment totals surged, Barrasso said the figures don’t mean anything. At least some form of intellectual consistency would be a welcome change of pace, but it’s apparently in short supply.

For another, there’s literally no evidence to suggest the enrollment totals are illegitimate or have been “cooked” for political purposes. For a Senate leader to make such a reckless accusation out of frustration – a U.S. senator is apparently annoyed by American consumers gaining access to affordable medical care – is deeply irresponsible.

To be sure, there are reasons to keep the champagne on ice. The political world is understandably invested in knowing just how many folks sign up for coverage, but we don’t yet know how many of these new consumers will pay their premiums and keep their coverage. Also, as Kaiser’s Drew Altman explained last week, watching the enrollment thresholds shouldn’t obscure related questions about cost, quality, and duration, the answers to which will come in time.

But ACA opponents aren’t counseling patience, waiting for more information. On the contrary, they’re doing the opposite – confronted with information they find ideologically confusing, Republicans have suddenly become Luke Skywalker, learning who his father is for the first time.

“No! That’s not true!” they say. “That’s impossible!”

Reality, however, is stubborn. It’s eerily reminiscent of Election Night 2012 – conservatives had spent months telling themselves that the polls are wrong, the evidence was skewed, and the facts had been manipulated by rascally liberals, so they were absolutely shocked when President Obama won a second term rather easily.

A year and a half later, conservatives have told each other repeatedly that the entire federal health care system is collapsing, “Obamacare” has entered an inescapable a “death spiral,” and consumers simply have no interest in signing up for coverage. The epistemic closure was unyielding and effective.

Which makes it easier to understand why confused senators would rather believe the White House is “cooking the books” than deal with the facts as they exist.



To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 12:53:27 PM
From: bentway  Respond to of 1574265
 
Obamacare is already working, at least on one front

By Matt Phillips @ MatthewPhillips 2 hours ago
http://qz.com/193194/obamacare-is-already-working-at-least-on-one-front/


The website wasn't always working well. But the cost controls look like they are. AP Photo/Jon Elswick




Forget all the feel-good stuff about looking after the wellbeing of fellow citizens. When it comes to the impact of Obamacare—the deadline to sign up for the new US healthcare program is today—budget geeks have one key question: Will it rein in the decades-long spiral in healthcare inflation?

+



As America’s population gets older, unrestrained healthcare cost inflation is seen as a driver of long-term US debt issues in the coming decades. So getting a handle on those costs is a priority.

+

Early indications look promising. Here’s a look at inflation data from a report out Friday morning.

+



It’s worth noting that the inflation data above is from the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) report. While not as well-known as the consumer price index (CPI), the PCE inflation report is an alternative gauge of price increases. And when it comes to healthcare inflation, PCE is the number to watch. That’s because CPI data includes only healthcare spending by consumers themselves. It leaves out employer spending on healthcare, as well as government spending on healthcare. (Which is significant: about half of all healthcare spending comes from federal, state and local governments in the US.)

+

President Barack Obama’s marquee healthcare overhaul—the Affordable Care Act—is designed in part to halt the rise of healthcare inflation by trimming Medicare payment increases. It also shouldn’t be overlooked that an across-the-board 2% cut to Medicare payments also went into effect in April 2013, as part of the so-called sequester. And it’s these changes to policy that are driving the slowdown in US healthcare costs, according to a note from Goldman Sachs economists published earlier this year.

+

We believe that much of the recent trend is also clearly due to exogenous policy influences: First, sequestration cut the price that Medicare pays for most services by 2%, along with the more publicized cuts to defense and non-defense federal spending. Second, the Affordable Care Act reduced payment rates for most segments of Medicare starting in late 2010.

+

“Health spending growth—particularly the share financed by the federal government—still looks likely to be somewhat slower than expected a few years ago,” they concluded.

+

This is a very good sign. After all, America remains a giant outlier in healthcare spending. (And not in a good way.) In other words, a change is well past due.

+




To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 6:47:53 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1574265
 
Obamacare Enrollment May Hit Initial 7 Million Goal at Deadline

Crock of shit. We have fewer insured today than we had when the fucking law was passed.


And that's because you say so..........AMIRITE?!



To: i-node who wrote (777542)3/31/2014 6:50:32 PM
From: tejek1 Recommendation

Recommended By
bentway

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574265
 
But today, a poll showed something new: in at least one survey, the ACA is no longer underwater.

Public support for the Affordable Care Act narrowly notched a new high in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, while criticism of Barack Obama's handling of the law's rollout – although still substantial -- has eased from its peak last fall.

Views hardly are enthusiastic: With the year's sign-up deadline upon us, Americans split on Obamacare, 49 percent in support, 48 percent opposed. But that compares with a 40-57 percent negative rating after the initial failure of the federal enrollment website last November.