Wrath of Dagon

The government is out to kill you: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/21/usda-must-rethink-cyanide-bombs-that-injured-boy-killed-pets-lawmaker-says.html

1) Costs went up, but it's arguable due to what. ACA didn't really do anything to control costs. 2) Under the repeal, subsidies would be greatly diminished, thus fewer people would be able to afford it. 3) Some people won't pay anything no matter how much you subsidize them. In states that refused to expand Medicaid, a lot wouldn't make enough to qualify for ACA while not having the Medicaid option either. Also illegal aliens are theoretically not eligible.

British courts already were involved. Hmm, then I can only surmise that they don't have the broad latitude to single handedly block things. We could learn a lot from the UK in this regard. In UK courts can not overrule the Parliament, but American courts can overrule Congress. Our system of separation of powers is completely different, which would be fine if it wasn't abused.

Found out my old Saitek flight stick does work with Windows 10. You just have to find it in the bowels of the OS under "Hardware and Sound" and calibrate it, works using the generic driver.

May be Obama can teach him how to work 3 hours a day.

The guy above can donate to all those causes if he wants. Looks like $12 is just for climate change, which for some reason he broke into 3 pieces.

It's a good response, but it isn't an either or proposition. We can have diplomacy and military readiness. Yes, but I'm sure the State Department can afford to cut back on champagne, lobster and caviar at their parties, the millions dollar tulip landscaping, and close the embassy in Upper ****landia. It's not that expensive to flap your lips. Meanwhile, Trump is already taking action: http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/03/16/trump-puts-business-experience-in-pentagon.html

Don't think they're eliminating the school lunch program. They're eliminating Community Block Development Grant ($3 billion total) to states which is used by states to fund some other social programs, like after school care in some districts.

si vis pacem, para bellum

I'm sure the State Department blowhards really put the fear of God in those Ruskies!

I'm not assuming, I said "hopefully". Even if they do, it'll take a long time and will run into furious bureaucratic resistance. Meanwhile the military is in a shocking state of readiness. Also the spending increase isn't as much as it seems, as it's only from the very severe budge sequestration level, which hasn't actually been triggered since 2013.

The study came out in 2015 and the article was published before Trump even took office, so why are you blaming him for that? Also the $125 billion is over 5 years, so not quite as much as might seem at first blush. Hopefully Mattis and Trump do act on those recommendations, the procurement process and probably everything else over there is a complete mess.

I think normally the government could emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. Right now the SC is in flux though.

That stumped me for a bit. It's because you're approximating with an infinitesimal zig-zag, not an infinitesimal straight line.

But... but... think of all the lost FREEDOM in the revenue streams of insurance companies and care providers! (On your latter point, I think the thinking is not to have replacement federal regulations, but instead to allow folks to buy from the state they choose. Which would trigger a classic "race to the bottom," as one or more "enterprising" states would inevitably strip away all the regulations that insurers hate most to attract them to move their HQ to that state. Sort of like how every credit card issuer is in either DE or SD. Costs would likely be lower, but it would also make effective consumer protection regulation very difficult.) I guess that must be what they're thinking. But health insurance is a lot more complicated than credit cards, and a lot of credit is federally regulated now. An insurance regulator in Wisconsin would be completely unable to deal with problems of a customer in Texas, as he's got no jurisdiction here at all. And the insurance company would still have to comply with all the local laws, but there would be no one to make sure that they do. Major insurance companies are already participating in most states, so it wouldn't even make much difference. So yes, it just shows that people who think this is some kind of a holy grail don't know much about how health insurance works at all.

I would let people buy into Medicare, but Republicans in Congress are dead set against it. It's also ironic that they think letting people buy insurance across state lines would solve all the problems, but that means they would have to get rid of state regulation and have a federal regulatory take over, which is something they're also rabidly against.

Because it doesn't bring any additional costs to the company. I'm not saying its a good program, and it violates the hell out of privacy, I'm just trying to figure out what the "company" gains with this information? Usually the gain would a reduction in insurance premiums or something like that but that's not a concern for them anymore since everyone is mandated to carry health insurance now. EDIT: I supposed lost time and productivity would be cost sinks. Usually a company's insurance premiums are tied to the amount the insurance company pays out in claims, especially if the company is self insured. So it has a tremendous impact on their costs.

Hey, they stole my idea: https://newrepublic.com/article/140948/bluexit-blue-states-exit-trump-red-america I guess now that the shoe is on the other foot.

Obama's much lower percentage of recidivism of released GITMO detainees seems fishy to me. They stopped releasing their names in 2009, coincidence? http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/jan/25/cory-gardner/how-many-released-guantanamo-bay-prisoners-commit-/

Couple more articles on why Republican health care plan is so bad: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-03-07/the-republican-plan-is-even-worse-than-obamacare http://healthpolicyandmarket.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-house-republican-obamacare.html

Well, they can try, but Obamacare is collapsing, and unless something is done, they'll be thrown out next election.

An in-depth discussion of the new health care proposal: https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/03/07/house-gops-obamacare-replacement-will-make-coverage-unaffordable-for-millions-otherwise-its-great/#4d7b92e537fd Hopefully they can get their act together eventually. Doing it under budget reconciliation rules is a dumb idea, it'll produce another Obamacare-like monstrosity.

Good summary of recent controversies here: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445548/democrats-unintended-consequences-media-collusion-partisan-overreach

It seems like there are always a few head scratching plot points in the HBS games. I always try to remember that it is basically a pulp fantasy universe brought to life, and it's best not to look too closely under the hood. Although I did read way too many of those Shadowrun books as a kid, so I probably have a high tolerance. Yeah, I wasn't really complaining, just commenting on the absurdity. Unlike some people, I don't expect realism or even much logic from games, unless it's a simulation.

Pas d’Argent, Pas de Suisse