American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[QUOTE=Dickhead;442475]I dunno bro. Maybe. I grew up with heating oil. It could be that CO was using coal fired plants in the 70s and 80s. I did know it was still the largest single source. On (forced air) natural gas heating, it's not good for your skin and your sinuses (your hair too according to my lady friends, but I haven't actually noticed that) and if you don't clean the ducts regularly some people can get respiratory issues. That is probably more of an issue in the dry climates I've lived in than maybe where y'all are from. I'm not saying it's unsafe, just not as healthy as say radiant hot water heating. My favorite kind of heating is those tubes under the floor, similar to what they use for driveways in some places. Quieter too. I spent a summer in college putting those things in, hard fucking work too. I guess it might be the case with natural gas, in some locations, that the ultimate consumer might not know how the gas they are using is generated? Don't the utilities kinda buy that shit from wherever?[/QUOTE]I think it's a safe bet that you had coal fired power plants in CO in the 70s and 80s considering Colorado currently receives more than 70 percent of its electricity from coal-fired power plants, and plans are in place to build more.

[URL]http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/energy/coal/colorado.php[/URL]

[URL]http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Category:Existing_coal_plants_in_Colorado[/URL]

I grew up in a house that had an old fuel oil furnace and it was a horrible stinky system, when we converted to natural gas we thought it was a god sent. If you think gas heat is dry give wood heat a try. Keeping the duct work clean is a problem for any forced air system be it heat pump, wood, gas, electric or even in air conditioning systems. I also like radiant hot water heating it's a very nice warm heat as was the old radiator systems, but the water in those systems has to be heated and I'd be willing to bet the vast majority of them are heated with fossil fuels.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;442475]Let's shoot for a modest goal. I believe that in 20 years less than half the private cars will use fossil fuels and virtually none of the public transit. And the mileage of the remaining fossil fuel cars will be say 75 or 80 MPG. We can do that, right? I also think there is a lot of potential energy savings to be had in these apps where you can control your thermostat from your cell phone. Shit, I live in a three year old townhome and it doesn't even have a programmable thermostat (not that my friend who owns it would be able to figure out how to use one if we had one, but still). Seems like that should be a requirement for all new construction.[/QUOTE]Let me work this one backwards, if I was living in the home of a friend that didn't have a programmable thermostat I would install one for him especially if I was paying the heating bill. They are fairly easy to install and anyone who can figure out how operate one can probable figure out how to install it. I tend to agree with you about potential energy savings and if I was in a situation where it was feasible I would enjoy living off grid, but mainly because I like being independent.

The best I can say about your "modest goal" and I don't intend any malice here but Dude it's a pipe dream. I'm unaware of any available technology to get 75-80 mpg. What would you power all the other vehicles with, batteries perhaps? If so how would you charge all these batteries, with electricity from fossil fuel?

Since this is the political thread lets move back that way and let me ask you this. If the federal government is going to subsidize battery powered cars, (which I don't support) don't you think the owners of those cars should be required to charge their batteries with electric from renewable energy sources, or be required to pay penalty/tax if they charge from traditional sources? The penalty/tax would help offset the cost of the subsidy.

Sidebar: where I grew up you seldom heard anyone say "y'all" now if you went a little farther south say down around Al Gore country you'd hear it a lot from them ridgerunners. However we did get a few visitors from over in Obama land that liked to say "you'ins" as in "you'ins are some sumbitches, I tell ya." Most of those guys were redneck flatlanders but their politics was bluer than blue, I'm talkin yellow dog Democrats, and I heard a lot of 'em up and moved to Colorado that's why they was able to elect a Republican governor in Obama land this year.

Now back to Jonathan Gruber and ObamaCare, a subject that's not going away anytime soon.

[QUOTE=WorldTravel69;442479]The people can have health care.[/QUOTE]The "[I]people[/I]" had health care before Obamacare.

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;442478]The "end" is that the USA finally offers affordable healthcare to all its citizens[/QUOTE]The USA offered "[I]affordable healthcare to all of its citizens[/I]" before Obamacare, all they had to do was buy it with [U]their[/U] [U]money[/U].

The only difference is now they can buy it with [U]my[/U] [U]money[/U].

Let's stop pretending that there was no health care in the USA before Obamacare.

Thanks,

Jax

[QUOTE=Punter127;442481]Let me work this one backwards, if I was living in the home of a friend that didn't have a programmable thermostat I would install one for him especially if I was paying the heating bill. They are fairly easy to install and anyone who can figure out how operate one can probable figure out how to install it.[/QUOTE]It's a her and she's been separated from hubby over two years now and she won't even change a burned out light bulb. I did, in fact, offer to install one if she wanted to buy one and the few tools that would be needed. She declined this, which may have been a slight on my mechanical skills, but I think mostly it's because she's not here. Not that this point of view makes any sense, since it's she and not I who's paying the heating (and AC too), but it's a woman so sense is not a factor.

[QUOTE=Punter127;442481]If the federal government is going to subsidize battery powered cars, (which I don't support) don't you think the owners of those cars should be required to charge their batteries with electric from renewable energy sources, or be required to pay penalty/tax if they charge from traditional sources? The penalty/tax would help offset the cost of the subsidy.[/QUOTE]Sure, if they can. But remember my proposal was not aimed at subsidizing any particular technology, just mpg in general. I don't really know how those charging stations function, although I'm sure you do. Is it mostly a marginal cost per car charged or is most of the cost in creating the capacity to begin with? The problem, as with many new technologies, is getting enough early adapters to achieve critical mass. Subsidies, while inherently evil, can sometimes help achieve that mass. Of course, then the subsidies have a nasty tendency to not go away once they're no longer needed. Kinda like the mortgage insurance deduction.

[QUOTE=Jackson;442482]The USA offered "[I]affordable healthcare to all of its citizens[/I]" before Obamacare[/QUOTE]I'm curious as to how you would go about defining "affordable." Percent of income? Percent of assets? Plus, your statement is pretty dubious considering that insurers routinely refused to cover those with pre-existing conditions, at [B]any[/B] price. I'd be interested in your response to that. Maybe you want to amend that to:

"The USA offered affordable care to all healthy and wealthy citizens before Obamacare.".

That would be orders of magnitude more accurate. But anyway, thanks for helping to pay for the free hearing aids I got yesterday. $10,600 of taxpayer money and they stopped working after three hours. That's gotta be Obama's fault somehow.

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;442478]The "means" were that the ACA was passed by majority vote in both chambers of the US Congress, signed into law by the sitting US President and later declared Constitutional by the SCOTUS. The "end" is that the USA finally offers affordable healthcare to all its citizens and becomes the last member of the civilized world to do so.[/QUOTE]The "means" were ObamaCare being shoved through the sludge of parliamentary trickery, lies, horse trading, cooked-up numbers and false promises. Signed into law by the sitting US President who also lied, and later part of it was declared Constitutional by the SCOTUS, however other parts are still being evaluated. There is no "end" unless the law is repealed or struck down by the SCOTUS .

It's just a law, it's not even a constitutional amendment and it's certainly not chiseled in stone.

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;442478]The "means" were that the ACA was passed by majority vote in both chambers of the US Congress, signed into law by the sitting US President and later declared Constitutional by the SCOTUS. The "end" is that the USA finally offers affordable healthcare to all its citizens and becomes the last member of the civilized world to do so.[/QUOTE]You statement regarding offering "affordable" healthcare to "all its citizens" is just another falsehood. It maybe affordable to those receiving subsidies but is it not so for all those paying higher premiums after being forced off their original plans which did not meet ACA standards. Second even the Democrats and Obama admitted there would still be something like 20 to 30 million citizens without coverage when all was said and done. The second shoe drops in 2015 when companies employing more than 100 employees fall under ACA.

EAP is just spouting rubbish.

While some aspects of the law will be recycled into another healthcare bill, ACA/ObamaCare will parish and may do so this summer after the Supremes hear the subsidies case. I predict Roberts will be on the other side of the fence on this one.

Tonight Obamation will seal the fate of the Democrats for 2016. Conservatives could ask for no greater weapon against the liberals than Obama.

[QUOTE=Dickhead;442475]
Let's shoot for a modest goal. I believe that in 20 years less than half the private cars will use fossil fuels and virtually none of the public transit. [/QUOTE]Lets back up a bit. What I was trying to ask you is how would the non fossil fuel cars and public transit be powered in your "modest goal"?

[QUOTE=Dickhead;442484](snip)
But anyway, thanks for helping to pay for the free hearing aids I got yesterday. $10,600 of taxpayer money and they stopped working after three hours. That's gotta be Obama's fault somehow.[/QUOTE]Actually, I would blame Obama if you got those hearing aids through ACA. Thems some expensive contraptions!

My father got hearing aids about a year ago, for around a 1/4 of the price. They work well - the biggest complaint he has is the battery lifetime. And he is far from rich...

"Making healthcare affordable" for everyone shouldn't mean putting crap on top of more crap so that the government can redistribute wealth. It should mean fixing the underlying problems so that we don't have to subsidize over-priced healthcare for those who truly can't afford it. If Obama had put his political capital into something like that (even if he'd failed!), I would have voted for him his second term.

[QUOTE=Punter127;442487]Lets back up a bit. What I was trying to ask you is how would the non fossil fuel cars and public transit be powered in your "modest goal"?[/QUOTE]The engineers and scientists are going to have to solve that one, or Elon Monk or some other genius. I don't have any type of science background at all. Remember, I'm a liberal arts major. I took meteorology as my science. I can tell you all about the lifting condensation level but how to power vehicles, not so much. That's why I have no opinion on fracking or global warming; those opinions would be based on nothing. But I think you thought from my previous post that I somehow thought radiant heat came by osmosis or something. I'm not claiming it saves money. I don't know that either. And sure, it's the presence of the ducts and not the natural gas that causes the respiratory problems, but the point was that other types of systems don't have ducts at all.

[QUOTE=ElQueso;442488]Actually, I would blame Obama if you got those hearing aids through ACA. Thems some expensive contraptions!

My father got hearing aids about a year ago, for around a 1/4 of the price. They work well - the biggest complaint he has is the battery lifetime. And he is far from rich...

"Making healthcare affordable" for everyone shouldn't mean putting crap on top of more crap so that the government can redistribute wealth. It should mean fixing the underlying problems so that we don't have to subsidize over-priced healthcare for those who truly can't afford it. If Obama had put his political capital into something like that (even if he'd failed!), I would have voted for him his second term.[/QUOTE]That was the MSRP. I'll have to see what the insurance company actually pays the audiologist. Last time it was $5,400 but these are a newer technology. Notice I didn't say a better technology, although for the brief three hours they functioned ($3,533 an hour for those keeping track at home) they did seem considerably better. They do have a 3 year warranty versus 2 years for the older ones.

I thought it was kind of wasteful in the first place since the old hearing aids still work, but they are out of warranty so there was my incentive, plus I'm leaving. As much as they conk out, I think it's probably reasonable to have a second pair, but why the fuck do they conk out so much if they are supposed to be the latest and greatest? That would be my question.

I don't know if this means anything, but both the audiologists I have been to were super cute and had major hotties working at the front desk. This one is from Australia by way of Arkansas and you can just imagine how cute her accent is.

Why do so many Americans that I meet have partial hearing problems? The slanting of the neck for better ear positioning is a regular feature these days. Can we coin that as the giraffe pose?

But then it could be my whispering.

My 31 yo grand-nephew from the States who I am trying to rehabilitate into a useful citizen already has hearing problems. I have to ask him to tone down in public because he can't hear himself. Nothing like shouting about all the drugs he ate or the women who got naked on him while riding the subway in Bangkok. Fortunately, 90% of them don't understand English and the 7% don't get it because of the speed & slang of the conversation. Meanwhile, I just try to look casual as if we are talking about where the best pad-thai are.

[QUOTE=ElAlamoPalermo;442478] The "end" is that the USA finally offers affordable healthcare to all its citizens and becomes the last member of the civilized world to do so.[/QUOTE]Do you really believe this? Is this what the pundits on MSNBC are spouting?

The USA does not offer affordable healthcare. Healthcare costs in the USA as a % of GDP, at 17.9%, are higher than anywhere else in the world. And they're projected by the United States government to rise to 19.9% of GDP in 2022. Take out Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tuvalu and U.S. territories and costs are at least 50% higher in the United States than any other country in the world.

As to your apparent belief that ALL citizens will have health insurance, that's not true. There were 48 million uninsured in 2011. After Obamacare takes full effect, in 2016, the CBO expects the number to go down to 30 million and remain flat. So after all this, there will still be 30 million people outside the system.

I can't understand how you guys can not only defend the ACA, but also believe it was a great accomplishment.

Here are my sources if you care to review the truth instead of living in a dreamworld:

[URL]http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS[/URL]

[URL]http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/proj2012.pdf[/URL]

[URL]http://kff.org/health-reform/fact-sheet/the-uninsured-and-the-difference-health-insurance/[/URL]

[URL]http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43900-2014-04-ACAtables2.pdf[/URL]

[QUOTE=Dickhead;442471]My community can decide it does not want massage parlors or e-cigarettes or angle parking or buildings over X feet high or almost anything else. So why can't they ban fracking if that's the community's desire? The one thing I came up with is that zoning changes often grandfather in existing uses, for the reasons Tiny mentions, but apparently we can't even ban it for newly purchased land. So, to me, it just looks like special treatment for the energy industry.[/QUOTE]I do not believe your community should outlaw massage parlors, e-cigarettes, angle parking, tall buildings, fracking or marijuana. Maybe your community should place restrictions on new oil and gas wells, which is a very different issue from fracking, as I've already explained. I will leave it at that, as I'm as dogmatic about fracking as you are about corporate taxation.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;442494]I do not believe your community should outlaw massage parlors, e-cigarettes, angle parking, tall buildings, fracking or marijuana. Maybe your community should place restrictions on new oil and gas wells, which is a very different issue from fracking, as I've already explained. I will leave it at that, as I'm as dogmatic about fracking as you are about corporate taxation.[/QUOTE]My fucking soon-to-be-ex community did in fact outlaw marijuana despite the fact that 54% of the voters in our town voted for the amendment that legalized it. So, this week the adjoining school district was presented with $905,000 in marijuana tax money and we got nothing. Now I have to consume additional fossil fuels to drive to the next town. But at least it's a hybrid.

[URL]http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/11/21/house-panel-debunks-benghazi-theories/19367265/[/URL]

Obama bashers are like hounds in a fox chase. Frenzied, yelping, they are always in heat when they have the tiniest of a drift of an Obama scandal. Under the pretensions of patriotism & truth, their outrage of Obama verge on the ridiculous more often than not. At the end of the day, the catch was never worth the chase. But to their grave, they will bring their conviction that Obama was nothing but a fraud, even a traitor. Nail him to the cross! How can a son of a carpenter or a Kenyan immigrant perform miracles? "A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household."(Matthew 13.57).

I know some of you will puke at any Biblical references, but in reality, you can really understand & differentiate goodness & evil very well there. Something not always very clear in secular society.