When Gruber said the stupidity of the voters was required to pass the ACA he had people like Matty in mind.
...said the dipshit who voted for a guy who said everyone would have better and cheaper and beautiful healthcare if he was elected to office.
Well, at least Obamacare was the death of the Democrat party.
Obamacare corporate welfare for the insurance companies, or for those companies that want to take on the risk and assume they will be at a later date bailed out.
Oh that picture begs for a caption contest.
@Tom C: "I'm against big corporations and big banks"
Does this mean you supported Dodd Frank (which very significantly hamstrung large banks)?
Oh, yeah, I'm sure the big banks were shaking in their boots over Dodd-Frank. They made boatloads of money over the thing, by collecting fat fees issue dodgy mortgages, and then bundling those sketchying things into CMOs that were sold to the gullible public, and many were paid off with taxpayer bailouts. Just another big rip-off of the citizens. Haven't seen too many of those bankers in line at the soup kitchen.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
How about: 1. Letting merchants charge extra if I use my credit or debit card, rather than pass a LAW that prevents them from doing that, and
2. Going after bank collusion on account fees and unfair practices. "Retail banking" is DESIGNED to create overdrafts and fees.
What don't we have laws against these things that rob consumers of billions every year? Because politicians are in the pockets of the banks, rather than allowing free competition and fair business practices.
The first Clinton was the one that repealed the Glass-Steagal Act, or was it just a coincidence that SHTF at a later date.
Dodd-Frank ? put together by a collections of morons and/or sellouts like our illustrious Collins and the dead brain trust of the dottering US Senate. Where is their golden parachute? Can we pack their chute before they jump out of their financial ruin of the US that they have brought us?
That is what our congress deserves a big Splat when they hit the ground, as the rest of us hope the pilot can ditch it some where softer.
And as far as MATT and A Coward are concerned, I'd suspect that at least MATT was sure that OBAMA would bring Hope and Change after he voted for him twice, but he didn't asshole did he, he brought us the same wars the same bureaucratic police state that that every admin wished they could have instituted.
So what's your point that The Donald supporters were as naïve as Obama supporters?
Or was it actually that The Donald supporters had at least some clue as to what a lying SOB Obama was and knew that Hiliary was one of the biggest crooks to sit in a position of power and we never wanted to see that again.
So what is your bitch Matt, who is the stupidest voter in America, those that vote Democrat or GOP?
No brainer, anyone that votes!
Individual Plans have been bad since ERISA in 1974 made non-employer buying groups illegal. So it's either employer plan, or individual.
Now, all the employer plans suck too... my premium tripled, and the deductible is now 5 times what it was. Nice... NOT.
Just another instance of stealing money from one group to buy votes from another group... and all we'll get is VA-style healthcare.
@Tom: "Oh, yeah, I'm sure the big banks were shaking in their boots over Dodd-Frank. They made boatloads of money over the thing, by collecting fat fees issue dodgy mortgages, and then bundling those sketchying things into CMOs that were sold to the gullible public, and many were paid off with taxpayer bailouts. Just another big rip-off of the citizens. Haven't seen too many of those bankers in line at the soup kitchen."
Sorry, I wasn't talking about the consumer side, I was talking about the Volcker rule and changes to the derivatives trading market (i.e. the elimination of bilateral trades with mandatory clearing).
The Volcker rule forces large consumer banks to stop prop trading (i.e. gambling with your FDIC insured money), and the derivatives trading changes essentially make executing brokers (the entities that sell derivatives) compete with each other instead of extracting money from pensions.
I agree with both 1 and 2. 1 is clearly a move by credit card issuers to make their products more palatable. However, economically it really shouldn't make a difference, because merchants will just up their prices (almost all merchants take CC's so there isn't any competitive asymmetry) and the competition for cash back and rewards forces any extra profit back into the hands of the consumers, so it all works out in the end.
(In any event, I think mobile payments will snuff out a lot of credit card usage in 10-15 years. I can use my phone to pay in probably 25% of POS (point of sale) terminals. Even though it just charges a credit card, once that % reaches 80%, you can bet that Apple Pay and Android Pay will just eliminate the middle man and provide direct debiting of your account).
@Mike G: "The first Clinton was the one that repealed the Glass-Steagal Act, or was it just a coincidence that SHTF at a later date."
It was, and it was a huge mistake, which I've never supported. I was not happy with Clinton by 2000 and actually voted for Nader rather than have Gore which would have been more of the same (yes, I was one of those, though I was living in California, so my vote didn't matter).
Dodd-Frank is mostly a good piece of legislation, but like any legislation, there are places where it lacks (like Tom C noted), and places where it just sucks (some of the consumer banking restrictions are just dumb.)
However, economically it really shouldn't make a difference, because merchants will just up their prices
Does it make sense for a merchant to charge shipping if he has to mail an item to you? Or should a merchant factor into his prices to charge ALL customers for shipping, even if they pick up the item at the store or warehouse?
Why are politiians of all stripes in bed with this scam?
Most of Trump's flak is coming from corrupt insider politicians who want nothing to do with the populist side. So-called Democrats that claim to be against the "establishment" are the establishments biggest tools. They're the suckers.
I'm not saying I agree with it, I think a merchant should be able to charge whatever they want, and by forcing one price for all payment forms, you are essentially eliminating competition between rates charged by different issuers.
What I'm saying is that unless you are paying cash, it doesn't really make a difference to the buyer, or to the merchant, since buyers will invariably drift towards higher rewards programs.
(If you pay cash or if you are dumb enough to carry a balance then you are being screwed.)