Affordable Care Act/Obama-care Supreme Court ruling...

[JayHawk]

Ooh Kuli so you mean a failure to compromise once again results in sore losers?

Sounds like our political system every since Democrats refused to budge on immigration or Social Security because they could hold out for power.

gee that sounds familiar somehow...

 

[Kulindahr]

You will probably be able to apply for an exemption fron the brocolli requirement if you file all necessary forms in duadruplicate and do not have your stroke before the liberal bueauracrats act on you request in about 4 months.
Some areas are being told they may not have fireworks this year as it may disturb some birds. The interstate commerce clause strikes again.

No interstate commerce involved; the migratory birds act involves a treaty with Mexico and Canada (and even into South America). [trivia: originally it was with Great Britain, which also acted on behalf of Canada] There's no limit of what Congress can do in a treaty.

So if they make a treaty with Mexico that agrees every American will eat broccoli in order to guarantee Mexico a market, there's nothing to counter that -- treaties are treaties.

 

[Kulindahr]

Fireworks bans this year have more to do with the wildfire climate across the country than birds.

Yep. There are some displays on the coast being moved to barges out past the surf, to reduce the danger.

OTOH that adds in interesting touch -- fireworks over the surf can be awesome!

 

[JayHawk]

I would like to suggest we take the war on drugs and flush it down the toilet, then use that budget money to fund the healthcare system which would still result in Americans getting money back after of course we paid off our big brother bailout and the two wars....

THEN we could mass produce cannabis, tax it like booze and smokes and make billions... oh and the industrial use for hemp outstrips corn by a gagillion-fold and it out produces on the same acre of land by four to one so we can use the industrial variety to make everything from clothes to the replacement of oil derivative products like plastics to biofuel...

Medicine and Marijuana... it is the entire answer all on its own....

P.S. One last bene reducing corn would reduce corn syrup so the soda would have to resort to healthier actual sugar products.....

 

[Kulindahr]

Ooh Kuli so you mean a failure to compromise once again results in sore losers?

Sounds like our political system every since Democrats refused to budge on immigration or Social Security because they could hold out for power.

gee that sounds familiar somehow...

A big piece of the stubbornness is that the display there has drawn tourists from across the country for years, filling every motel and campground within thirty miles. The town is in a unique place, with cliffs to north and south that make a beautiful display as surf shoots up the rocks and catches the colors. It's been a while since I've done more than drive by, but as I recall the south cliff, known a South Point, is basically bird-free. If that's still so, they ought to be able to work a deal with the state -- which according to the maps I can find owns the tips -- to launch from there. It would be almost 2000 feet farther away, according to google maps.

Other than that, they might have to go with a barge, but even with a barge they'll be more than that 2000 ft farther from the traditional point.

Someone suggested taking the "boom!" fireworks from the lineup, but some species react to the bright lights, so that's only a partial solution. The fish and wildlife study bothers me because there's no indication that they differentiated by species, which is sloppy science. If the birds covered under the treaty aren't being bothered, the whole legal situation shifts. If endangered species aren't be bothered, it shifts again -- then we're down to the level of the Oregon Coast Islands Wildlife Preserve, where all that's needed is an exemption for one day out of the year.

 

[Kulindahr]

I would like to suggest we take the war on drugs and flush it down the toilet, then use that budget money to fund the healthcare system which would still result in Americans getting money back after of course we paid off our big brother bailout and the two wars....

THEN we could mass produce cannabis, tax it like booze and smokes and make billions... oh and the industrial use for hemp outstrips corn by a gagillion-fold and it out produces on the same acre of land by four to one so we can use the industrial variety to make everything from clothes to the replacement of oil derivative products like plastics to biofuel...

Medicine and Marijuana... it is the entire answer all on its own....

P.S. One last bene reducing corn would reduce corn syrup so the soda would have to resort to healthier actual sugar products.....

Um, if we're going to take mary jane off the books, it should be allowed for family businesses only, not companies that function in more than one state.

And yes, the part of the product people don't smoke can be turned into fiber and the remnant can go to feed stock for biofuels. Hemp rope, BTW, still outperforms plastic.

Oh -- only put half the money into health care; cut the other half from the budget to reduce the deficit.

 

[FuryOfFirestorm]

I guess when doesn't have an argument they need to resort to red herrings like complaining that the government is telling them they can't eat all the junk food they want. Nobody is being forced to do anything, so lets stop making things up please.

It's funny that the GOP is acting like Universal Health Care is an evil plot single-handedly thought of by Obama to destroy America...considering that 75% of the world has it and aren't crumbling to dust. North America is the only industrialized country that doesn't have universal health care.

 

[JayHawk]

Um, if we're going to take mary jane off the books, it should be allowed for family businesses only, not companies that function in more than one state.

And yes, the part of the product people don't smoke can be turned into fiber and the remnant can go to feed stock for biofuels. Hemp rope, BTW, still outperforms plastic.

Oh -- only put half the money into health care; cut the other half from the budget to reduce the deficit.

I get the 99% philosophy but I just want no deficit, no energy dependence and healthcare...

Oh and I may have worded it wrongly BUT I did say we could pay for health care and then return money to people after the deficit is gone. So we are agreed...

 

[Kulindahr]

^ Not so much 99% as quality.

The times in the US when we've had really spectacular beers have been when there are thousands and thousands of breweries. The same is true of wines.

Maybe someone will graft raspberry genes into marijuana so it will taste like fruit when smoking it. Maybe someone will come up with a way to brew it into beer so you can get two kinds of buzz at once. Maybe... all sorts of things. But if we let the big corporations get their hands on it, it will all be the same, all blah, nothing innovative.

Let ten thousand flowers bloom.

 

[JayHawk]

Our I think the variety will stay very distinctive. You use an apt analogy. The type and varieties are endless to begin with and they take from the soil they grow in just like the grape or hops or fruits used in spirits. Yet we have monster sized worldwide beverage companies and still have micro brews... We have starbucks and coffee houses that roast their own blends... No the only thing that need exist is a fair playing field.

 

[bankside]

No interstate commerce involved; the migratory birds act involves a treaty with Mexico and Canada (and even into South America). [trivia: originally it was with Great Britain, which also acted on behalf of Canada] There's no limit of what Congress can do in a treaty.

So if they make a treaty with Mexico that agrees every American will eat broccoli in order to guarantee Mexico a market, there's nothing to counter that -- treaties are treaties.

Fascinating. Canada and Australia are the twin brothers of the Commonwealth, but that's one of the key differences between the two.

The Australian federal government has the power to conclude treaties for any purpose in any area of competency, even if it undermines State authority. The Canadian government can conclude a treaty for any purpose, and the Provinces do not, but the Feds can't use treaty to impose anything on a Province which is within its constitutional scope of action. So Canada sits on the fence, in this awkward position where only the Feds can make treaties but they have to consult and persuade and cajole and [STRIKE]bribe[/STRIKE] compensate in order to make the provinces go along. I prefer the Australian / American approach, but that's because I'm a big nasty centralizing federalist.

 

[Kulindahr]

Our I think the variety will stay very distinctive. You use an apt analogy. The type and varieties are endless to begin with and they take from the soil they grow in just like the grape or hops or fruits used in spirits. Yet we have monster sized worldwide beverage companies and still have micro brews... We have starbucks and coffee houses that roast their own blends... No the only thing that need exist is a fair playing field.

We have monster sized beverage companies (beer) because they were created by the government. For once, I'd like to have government act for the people. Give them a ten-year head start before letting the giants into the playground.

 

[Kulindahr]

Fascinating. Canada and Australia are the twin brothers of the Commonwealth, but that's one of the key differences between the two.

The Australian federal government has the power to conclude treaties for any purpose in any area of competency, even if it undermines State authority. The Canadian government can conclude a treaty for any purpose, and the Provinces do not, but the Feds can't use treaty to impose anything on a Province which is within its constitutional scope of action. So Canada sits on the fence, in this awkward position where only the Feds can make treaties but they have to consult and persuade and cajole and [STRIKE]bribe[/STRIKE] compensate in order to make the provinces go along. I prefer the Australian / American approach, but that's because I'm a big nasty centralizing federalist.

This is why the Senate confirms treaties: that's considered to be the states in action. Theoretically, the senators will vote the way their states want -- and definitely would have, when they were chosen by the legislatures.

 

[chance1]

Wow - I thought the thread was about Obamacare

 

[bankside]

Wow - I thought the thread was about Obamacare

It is. Apparently all you would have needed is a treaty with Canada to insure all your citizens and that would have been enough to pass constitutional muster.

 

[chance1]

^ we just want their hockey

 

[JayHawk]

And their beer... eh!

Oh and Chance this is about the Affordable Care Act... just a side note. you can be sure republicans have accepted ACA when they stop calling it Obamacare because they cant take credit for creating it if Obama's name is still on it.... we are talkin a few election cycles but the nick-name will change.

 

[Benvolio]

And their beer... eh!

Oh and Chance this is about the Affordable Care Act... just a side note. you can be sure republicans have accepted ACA when they stop calling it Obamacare because they cant take credit for creating it if Obama's name is still on it.... we are talkin a few election cycles but the nick-name will change.

I doubt if Republicans will ever call it affordible. Since they tend to be taxpaxers, they will be stuck paying much higher rates for their own insurance plus paying for free or subsidized health care for all that bottom half who cannot pay a dime in Federal incomr taxes. And i have no doubt that each election cycle the Dems will buy votes by promising another level of income recipients free insurance at taxpayer expense.

 

[JayHawk]

That Ben is amusing. You have ZERO clue what you are talking about. Most Republicans come from red states that receive MORE tax money every year by two to one as their BLUE state counterparts. I care about the suffering of my fellow people on one hand but I really wish we could cancel out all of the federal aid that supplies most of these red states with the money to operate so that they can actually realize who pays their bills. It aint them and that is for damn sure.

I recent example from my EOB or Explanation of Benefits. These are familiar to many who have private insurance. The insurance companies set prices to which the practitioners must adhere or not do business with the insurance company. The same holds true for government run insurance such as the TRICARE system I receive healthcare benefits from frequently. My EOB usually has the cost charged and then the max authorized by the government pay scale. Without FAIL the paid amount is always one quarter or less of the charged rate. Practitioners charge high rates and see what they can suck out of the different companies. Everyone require to participate will allow market driven forces to offer the best programs AT government rates. Rates I might add that more than adequately cover the cost. That will reduce the cost of healthcare across the board by half at least. The reality is the premiums will decrease. I know. I know. It is hard to violate your single celled focus on one party is only right and Rush is God and says only half pay so he must know... BUT reality is we need healthcare. It will lower cost. It will make America more productive when everyone can work and achieve instead of going bankrupt in a ridiculously manipulated system. I know you have to stick to your talking points or be kicked out of the party of power BUT realize that if republicans ACTUALLY believe in a market driven society instead of power at any cost they would be firmly behind this bill. They wrote it after all.

Oh and by rename I mean they will re-craft it as their policy with a few minor changes at some point and then rename it the Patriotic Patriot and american Eagle Health Act. With a provision for free American Flag lapel pins to every participant.

 

[Kulindahr]

It is. Apparently all you would have needed is a treaty with Canada to insure all your citizens and that would have been enough to pass constitutional muster.

If that could be included ion a treaty as a promise to them in exchange for something -- yes. It would be a truly bizarre way to pass law, but it would be binding on all states.

Though I don't know what we have that Canada would like guaranteed to them in return for us guaranteeing all our citizens would have health care... and I don't know what benefit that could supposedly have for them.