Our idiot does it again...

[normiss 851]

although we seem to have an endless supply of funding to fight wars all over the planet..
Healthcare Veto

[pop 0]

Quote

although we seem to have an endless supply of funding to fight wars all over the planet..
Healthcare Veto

i think its too late to impeach him......though that would be nice. Grounds for impeachment -- dumbass!!!

I wonder what kind of kick back he got from the insurance companies for making this decision.

I love this quote from the article: "Critics have said their concern is that parents might be prompted to drop private coverage for their children to get cheaper coverage under the bill." Ummmm...yeah....and that is a bad thing how?

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[SpeedRacer 1]

Here are his reasons:

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 976, the "Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007," because this legislation would move health care in this country in the wrong direction.

The original purpose of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was to help children whose families cannot afford private health insurance, but do not qualify for Medicaid, to get the coverage they need. My Administration strongly supports reauthorization of SCHIP. That is why I proposed last February a 20 percent increase in funding for the program over 5 years.

This bill would shift SCHIP away from its original purpose and turn it into a program that would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year. In addition, under this bill, government coverage would displace private health insurance for many children. If this bill were enacted, one out of every three children moving onto government coverage would be moving from private coverage. The bill also does not fully fund all its new spending, obscuring the true cost of the bill's expansion of SCHIP, and it raises taxes on working Americans.

Because the Congress has chosen to send me a bill that moves our health care system in the wrong direction, I must veto it. I hope we can now work together to produce a good bill that puts poorer children first, that moves adults out of a program meant for children, and that does not abandon the bipartisan tradition that marked the enactment of SCHIP. Our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 3, 2007.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[pop 0]

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four. Especially if you are attmep[ting to buy a house, keep sevearl cars, and feed and clothe all 4 people. Private insurance for four people can easily run $500 per month, not to mention the rediculous out of pocket costs associated with these private plans.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four.

Yeah. It probably doesn't even qualify as "middle class".

[1969912 0]

The headline says "Bush vetoes child health insurance plan". Do you have any details on what that means, because it sounds pretty drastic and uncaring?

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[1969912 0]

Quote

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four. Especially if you are attmep[ting to buy a house, keep sevearl cars, and feed and clothe all 4 people. Private insurance for four people can easily run $500 per month, not to mention the rediculous out of pocket costs associated with these private plans.

That leaves $4,500/month. Maybe some people ought to sell some of their jet-skis and $40,000 macho big-dick pickup trucks if they can't live on that kind of money.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[favaks 0]

If people can't afford to raise a family, maybe they shouldn't have a family to begin with.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four.

Yeah. It probably doesn't even qualify as "middle class".

It depends on who they hang with and how many forks they set for dinner and what they call their limo - stuff like that.

How can you keep a limo AND a driver when health care costs are hanging over your head? Or even health care coverage for your driver.

Won't someone PLEASE think of the poor (and their servants)?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,070]

> If people can't afford to raise a family, maybe they shouldn't have
> a family to begin with.

That would involve some sort of birth control and THAT is just out of the question! I hear you go to hell if you use one of those rubber thingies. And don't they give you AIDS?

[Rookie120 0]

Quote

I hear you go to hell if you use one of those rubber thingies. And don't they give you AIDS?

No, they just turn you into a limp dick liberal.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck!

[1969912 0]

FYI. See attachment.



Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[pop 0]

Quote

Quote

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four. Especially if you are attmep[ting to buy a house, keep sevearl cars, and feed and clothe all 4 people. Private insurance for four people can easily run $500 per month, not to mention the rediculous out of pocket costs associated with these private plans.

That leaves $4,500/month. Maybe some people ought to sell some of their jet-skis and $40,000 macho big-dick pickup trucks if they can't live on that kind of money.

$4500 for 4 people is not that much. My kid's day care costs $800/mnth.I dont have another option. Then there is a house payment. There is your regular old bills. It's nice to go to a restaurant here and there. It adds up quick. When I had private insurance that I had to purchase myself because I was in business for myself....my out of pocket costs were $3K, I happened to get in a nasty car accident, and there goes $3K. I dont gree with Bush's decision.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[pop 0]

Quote

If people can't afford to raise a family, maybe they shouldn't have a family to begin with.

That's not always an option. My kid was an accident....wonderful accident, but nevertheless having a kid was the last thing I was planning on doing.

7 ounce wonders, music and dogs that are not into beer

[freeflybella 0]

More presidential BS:

"The president also complained that the bill would cover too many children who don't need federal help. "This program expands coverage, federal coverage, up to families earning $83,000 a year. That doesn't sound poor to me," the president told the Lancaster audience.

Dorn says that's not exactly right, either. "This bill would actually put new limits in place to keep states from going to very high-income levels. SCHIP money would no longer be available over 300 percent of the federal poverty level, which is about $60,000 for a family of four."

The president gets to make the $83,000 claim because New York had wanted to allow children in families with incomes up to four times the poverty level onto the program. That is, indeed, $82,600. The Department of Health and Human Services rejected New York's plan last month, and under the bill, that denial would stand. White House officials warn, however, that the bill would allow a future administration to grant New York's request. "

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14962685

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Here are his reasons:

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

....

This bill would shift SCHIP away from its original purpose and turn it into a program that would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year.

...
GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 3, 2007.

Pay attention to the weasel wording.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[freeflybella 0]

Quote

would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year.

Apparently, that's not even really true.

New York's limit was rejected hence, no family making 83,000 would benefit.

It could happen under future administrations.

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

If people can't afford to raise a family, maybe they shouldn't have a family to begin with.

Maybe they could afford it when they started a family, and their circumstances changed. Planning just 18 months ahead is beyond even the Bush administration**, so how can you expect regular folks to do it for 18 years?


**"Our budget will run a deficit that will be small and short-term", GWB, SOTU address January 2002.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year.

Apparently, that's not even really true.

New York's limit was rejected hence, no family making 83,000 would benefit.

It could happen under future administrations.

Depends on what the meaning of "almost" is.

After all, 9 is almost10. In fact, it's almost10.5, which makes 9 almost more than10.

So we can't really say Bush lied this time.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[freeflybella 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year.

Apparently, that's not even really true.

New York's limit was rejected hence, no family making 83,000 would benefit.

It could happen under future administrations.

Depends on what the meaning of "almost" is.

After all, 9 is almost10. In fact, it's almost10.5, which makes 9 almost more than10.

So we can't really say Bush lied this time.

Ha. You're right. I had no idea how smart he is!

And just for the record, the poverty level for a family of 4 in The United States of America is not $83,000.

It's $20,600. That's $396.00 per week.

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/07poverty.shtml

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[1969912 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

$83000 after taxes brings in approximatly $5K per month after taxes. That is not that much money for a family of four. Especially if you are attmep[ting to buy a house, keep sevearl cars, and feed and clothe all 4 people. Private insurance for four people can easily run $500 per month, not to mention the rediculous out of pocket costs associated with these private plans.

That leaves $4,500/month. Maybe some people ought to sell some of their jet-skis and $40,000 macho big-dick pickup trucks if they can't live on that kind of money.

$4500 for 4 people is not that much. My kid's day care costs $800/mnth.I dont have another option. Then there is a house payment. There is your regular old bills. It's nice to go to a restaurant here and there. It adds up quick. When I had private insurance that I had to purchase myself because I was in business for myself....my out of pocket costs were $3K, I happened to get in a nasty car accident, and there goes $3K. I dont gree with Bush's decision.

$800/month for childcare? You should be able to import a fulltime hooker from some third world country for that kind of money

Honestly though, it's pointless to even discuss this crap. It's like arguing religion. Some people believe that everyone wealthier than them owes them something. Some people have a different view. It's a difference in pholosophy, morality, values, etc.

Anyway, there is an interesting image attached that shows US income distribution. The legend for it is below. Note that the difference between ~$62,000 and ~$83,000 is about floor 22-25. The bill that GB refused to sign would have raised the upper income limit for the SCHIP program (4 kids) from 62k to 83k.

later
====================================================================

Legend for graph:

This graphic shows the distribution of gross annual household income. The building's thirty exposed floors are easily divided into quintiles, each income quintile represented by six floors. Each floor represents the tenth of a third (3.33%) of households in the US, and each section of 10 floors represent roughly one third of American society. The floors above the top black line represent those households with incomes of or exceeding $100,000. The floors below the bottom black line, however, represent those households who fell below the poverty threshold. In order to live on the top floor of the American income strata, a household's annual gross income needs to exceed $200,000.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[rushmc 23]

Quote

although we seem to have an endless supply of funding to fight wars all over the planet..
Healthcare Veto

Glad he did

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Here are his reasons:

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 976, the "Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007," because this legislation would move health care in this country in the wrong direction.

The original purpose of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) was to help children whose families cannot afford private health insurance, but do not qualify for Medicaid, to get the coverage they need. My Administration strongly supports reauthorization of SCHIP. That is why I proposed last February a 20 percent increase in funding for the program over 5 years.

This bill would shift SCHIP away from its original purpose and turn it into a program that would cover children from some families of four earning almost $83,000 a year. In addition, under this bill, government coverage would displace private health insurance for many children. If this bill were enacted, one out of every three children moving onto government coverage would be moving from private coverage. The bill also does not fully fund all its new spending, obscuring the true cost of the bill's expansion of SCHIP, and it raises taxes on working Americans.

Because the Congress has chosen to send me a bill that moves our health care system in the wrong direction, I must veto it. I hope we can now work together to produce a good bill that puts poorer children first, that moves adults out of a program meant for children, and that does not abandon the bipartisan tradition that marked the enactment of SCHIP. Our goal should be to move children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already have private health insurance to government coverage.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 3, 2007.

The bill also defind a chil being 25 years of age or yonger

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

$4500 for 4 people is not that much. My kid's day care costs $800/mnth.I dont have another option. Then there is a house payment. There is your regular old bills. It's nice to go to a restaurant here and there. It adds up quick. When I had private insurance that I had to purchase myself because I was in business for myself....my out of pocket costs were $3K, I happened to get in a nasty car accident, and there goes $3K. I dont gree with Bush's decision.

So, what you're saying is that other people (taxpayers) should pay for your child's insurance so you can go out to dinner whenever you wish.

[Royd 0]

If people can't afford to raise a family, maybe they shouldn't have
> a family to begin with.

Quote

That would involve some sort of birth control and THAT is just out of the question! I hear you go to hell if you use one of those rubber thingies. And don't they give you AIDS?

So this was a Catholic specific bill?