This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Legal Glitch "Has The Potential To Sink Obamacare"

Tyler Durden's picture


As if the technological problems facing Obamacare were not enough, a potentially major "legal glitch" could cause the healthcare law to unravel in 36 states. As the LA Times reports, The Affordable Care Act proposes to make health insurance affordable to millions of low-income Americans by offering them tax credits to help cover the cost. To receive the credit, the law twice says they must buy insurance "through an exchange established by the state." But 36 states have decided against opening exchanges for now. Critics of the law have seized on the glitch. They have filed four lawsuits that urge judges to rule the Obama administration must abide by the strict wording of the law, even if doing so dismantles it in nearly two-thirds of the states. And the Obama administration has no hope of repairing the glitch by legislation as long as the Republicans control the House..."This has the potential to sink Obamacare. It could make the current website problems seem minor by comparison," noted on policy expert.

Via LA Times,



President Obama's healthcare law also has a legal glitch that critics say could cause it to unravel in more than half the nation.




Apparently no one noticed this when the long and complicated bill worked its way through the House and Senate. Last year, however, the Internal Revenue Service tried to remedy it by putting out a regulation that redefined "exchange" to include a "federally facilitated exchange." This is "consistent with the language, purpose and structure … of the act as a whole," the Treasury Department said.




But critics of the law have seized on the glitch. They have filed four lawsuits that urge judges to rule the Obama administration must abide by the strict wording of the law, even if doing so dismantles it in nearly two-thirds of the states. And the Obama administration has no hope of repairing the glitch by legislation as long as the Republicans control the House.




"This is a problem," said Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University. "This case could have legs," although "it was never the intent of Congress to establish federal exchanges that can't do anything. They were supposed to have exactly the same powers."


Michael Carvin, the Washington lawyer leading the challenge, says the wording of the law is what counts. "This is a question of whether you believe in the rule of law. And the language here is as clear as it could possibly be," he said.




"This has the potential to sink Obamacare. It could make the current website problems seem minor by comparison," Cannon said.


Defenders of the law say the courts are being used as part of the political campaign against the law.


"This is definitely heating up. It is now the major focus of the Republican strategy for undoing the Affordable Care Act," said Simon Lazarus, a lawyer for the Constitutional Accountability Center. "The lawsuits should be seen as preposterous," he said, because they ask judges to give the law a "nonsensical" interpretation.




"They are betting on getting five votes at the Supreme Court," Lazarus said. "I don't think it will happen."


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:42 | 4094235 ninja247
ninja247's picture

"Legal Glitches" didn't stop the creation of the FED, Income Tax, Medicare etc...

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:48 | 4094247 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Agreed, and this legal "glitch" isn't going to stop Obamacare either.  The exchanges will all be ruled as "state" exchanges even though the federal government finances them in most states.  The insurance sold on them is still state-specific and that's where the deciding line will be drawn.

Details aren't going to take this thing down.  Everyone on both sides of the aisle want the power and control that this law provides.  Those currenly out of power dream of the day they will be in control and weild it.  Those currently in power relish their position over this new found control mechanism.  EVERYONE in the federal government wants this.  Both sides.

Which is why it will stay.  Just like the NSA program will stay.


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:56 | 4094255 SMG
SMG's picture

I hope you guys are wrong about that.

Obamacare is not about healthcare it is about CONTROL of the peasants for the oligarchs.

If it can be stopped it would be a really good thing.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:02 | 4094266 philipat
philipat's picture

Whether ACA fails, (in which case the next step by the Socialist/FSA complex will be a single payer system) or not, the net end result willb be Gubmin will control about 65% of the economy. That's slightly higher than France.

Just sayin...

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:10 | 4094280 Troll Magnet
Troll Magnet's picture

This is not some banana sez the chief criminal of the exceptional United States.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:36 | 4094308 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Here's what the courts will proclaim: If a state didn't bother to set up an exchange under the ACA, those in such a state who are enrolled in Obamacare won't qualify for the federal tax subsidies.

This is actually more consistent with the strict interpretation of the wording of the ACA than what is claimed by Michael Carvin in the article.

The end result will be even worse, since hardly anyone will be able to pay the monthly premiums, or even more so, the out of pocket, annual cash deductibles of $6,000 to nearly $18,000 (payments that must be made for Dr visits, procedures, medications, etc. before any coverage kicks in) without the subsidies.


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:51 | 4094347 philipat
philipat's picture

A broader issue which needs to be discussed is with $6000+ premiums and $6000+ deductibles, when does it stop being Health Insurance and start being a forced donation to health Insurers?

Better to have no insurance, even paying the fines, and have a nice fully-paid vacation in Asia when something serious needs doing. Standards in the Private Hospitals out here (Especially Malaysia and Thailand are very high and prices are less than 1/4 of general US prices, in part because there is competition. So in many cases, the total bill, including Return Business Class airfares, is lower than the cost of staying in the US.

Dirty little secret: The US spends double, as a percentage to GDP, that of other OECD countries and outcomes are worse. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that something is wrong in the US?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:58 | 4094365 Deo vindice
Deo vindice's picture

I still think the smart move by the GOP would be to simply let Obamacare be crushed under the weight of its own ineptitude.

It is so hopelessly flawed both in concept and methodology for implementation, that it cannot survive on its own.

The sheer numbers who cannot and will not sign up are of such a magnitude that the government will have to either back down, or play the heavy hand which could turn out to be the very tipping point for civil unrest that many believe is certainly coming.

Whenever you can win a battle by letting the enemy self-destruct, you have gained a true victory.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:51 | 4094501 Cult_of_Reason
Cult_of_Reason's picture

CBS: ObamaCare System Threatened From High Medicaid Enrollment In Many States (October 25, 2013)

“A CBS News Analysis Shows That In Many Of The 15 State-Based” ObamaCare Exchanges, “More People Are Enrolling In Medicaid Rather Than Buying Private Health Insurance.” “The disastrous rollout of may have another serious problem: A CBS News analysis shows that in many of the 15 state-based health insurance exchanges more people are enrolling in Medicaid rather than buying private health insurance.” (Jan Crawford, “Medicaid Enrollment Spike A Threat To ObamaCare Structure?” CBS News, 10/25/13)

And If That Trend Continues, There’s Concern There Won’t Be Enough Healthy People Buying Health Insurance For The System To Work.” (Jan Crawford, “Medicaid Enrollment Spike A Threat To ObamaCare Structure?” CBS News, 10/25/13)

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:00 | 4094732 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture



Send lawyers, guns, and get me out of this - Warren Zevon

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:12 | 4094736 negative rates
negative rates's picture

With 2 more States and a handful of governor's, we could just take him to hoop Kentucky style. 

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:32 | 4094751 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture



Anything is possible......we've got some democrats stating in public......WHAT THE HELL WE'RE WE THINKING?


Even Bill Maher is coming out against this nightmare.....that's like getting support from Mao!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:44 | 4094918 SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

This is a question of whether you believe in the rule of law. And the language here is as clear as it could possibly be," he said

Whether I believe in it or not is not at issue.  The fact remains that no one in power believes in it.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:51 | 4094925 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture





I don't think there's much rule of law when a President can pick and chose what part of Congressional law he's going with on a daily basis.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 11:20 | 4095072 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Which is straightforwardly impeachable. That's how far down the rabbit hole we are. Fascism on the march

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 12:31 | 4095209 Bad Attitude
Bad Attitude's picture

The rule of law is dead. It was on life support for many years, but it died the day Dear Leader and his regime took control. Now, Dear Leader only enforces the laws that further his political objectives, and ignores the laws that impede his political objectives. If he can't get Congress (specifically the Republican controlled House) to cooperate, he just issues an executive order to bypass the law.

This article sums up the current political situation:

Forward (over the cliff)!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 19:18 | 4096109 Lost Word
Lost Word's picture

If there had been rule of law, the Un-Natural Born citizen, without birth certificate,

Unconstitutional Fraud Obama would not be President,

but the coward congress and judges and justices have abandoned the rule of law.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 21:37 | 4096430 old naughty
old naughty's picture

In other (not so many) words, the two snakes, untangling just to prepare for the deadly bite of one another...

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:14 | 4094739 negative rates
negative rates's picture

I need an car insurance refund, 40 years payin, and never made a claim.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:41 | 4094821 Truthseeker2
Truthseeker2's picture

This really exposes the truth about Obamacare!

"Obamacare: The Hidden Agenda"


Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:48 | 4094503 knukles
knukles's picture

Time for another Executive Order

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:30 | 4094887 BoNeSxxx
BoNeSxxx's picture

How is this for a legal challenge to ObamaCare?

As I understand it, the good citizens of USA.Gov now need to PROVE they have healthcare coverage on their tax filing forms, correct?

Would there not be a Constitutional challenge in there somewhere?  Are we not innocent until proven guilty?

Seems to me the burden of proof is on the government and all I need to do is write: Yes.  It's their burden to prove me wrong and non-compliant -- not mine to prove innocence.  

What am I missing here?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 17:13 | 4095817 Meatier Shower
Meatier Shower's picture

When dealing with the IRS you are considered guilty until proven innocent.

It has been that way from the beginning.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 03:59 | 4094634 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Absolutely, Deo.

I simply could not fathom (and still cannot) the Republicans' efforts, up to and including political suicide, to accomplish naught but delay Obummercare's pernicious effects for one year (viz., until after the upcoming elections).

What the fuck?

Guess it's not called the Stupid Party for no reason.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:43 | 4094824 spankfish
spankfish's picture

+1 for the Samuel Francis "stupid party" quote/moniker of the Repubican't Party.

Mon, 10/28/2013 - 01:02 | 4096778 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

First time I heard Stupid Party was at a P. J. O'Rourke talk given in Moscow right after the fall of the Soviet Union. He had been invited to give a talk explaining America's political system. As best I can recall:

"In America, we have two parties: The Stupid Party and the Evil Party. I am a member of the Stupid Party. Every now and again, the two parties get together in what is called the spirit of bipartizenship and pass legislation that is truly stupid and evil."

Or words to that effect. He is a much better writer than me even though I let him teach me how to write good in an article published in the Harvard or National Lampoon back in the sixties(?). Long time ago.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:48 | 4094762 2bit Hoarder
2bit Hoarder's picture

exactly ... what the progressives simply cannot comprehend is that millions of young, healthy people are not going to rush to the exchanges to pay triple their current insurance premiums to fund this thing.

the concept of individual responsibilty facilitating the greater good will never occur to those who take no personal responsibility.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 14:29 | 4095503 wee-weed up
wee-weed up's picture



Deo vindice said:  I still think the smart move by the GOP would be...

Ha! When has this current crop of GOP congresscritters EVER made a smart move?

They've given Obummer everything he wanted on a silver platter!

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:18 | 4094397 ceilidh_trail
ceilidh_trail's picture

Data to back up the "dirty little secret"?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:56 | 4094431 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

It's all good. Between the deteriorating economy, massively growing debt, onerous ObamaCare tax coming, and "In Fed and Out, Many Now Think Inflation Helps," we'll be recovering in no time:

Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Fed, some of whose officials cite the slower pace of inflation as a reason to continue the stimulus.


Published: October 26, 2013

WASHINGTON — Inflation is widely reviled as a kind of tax on modern life, but as Federal Reserve policy makers prepare to meet this week, there is growing concern inside and outside the Fed that inflation is not rising fast enough.

Some economists say more inflation is just what the American economy needs to escape from a half-decade of sluggish growth and high unemployment.

The Fed has worked for decades to suppress inflation, but economists, including Janet Yellen, President Obama’s nominee to lead the Fed starting next year, have long argued that a little inflation is particularly valuable when the economy is weak. Rising prices help companies increase profits; rising wages help borrowers repay debts. Inflation also encourages people and businesses to borrow money and spend it more quickly.

The school board in Anchorage, Alaska, for example, is counting on inflation to keep a lid on teachers’ wages. Retailers including Costco and Walmart are hoping for higher inflation to increase profits. The federal government expects inflation to ease the burden of its debts. Yet by one measure, inflation rose at an annual pace of 1.2 percent in August, just above the lowest pace on record.

“Weighed against the political, social and economic risks of continued slow growth after a once-in-a-century financial crisis, a sustained burst of moderate inflation is not something to worry about,” Kenneth S. Rogoff, a Harvard economist, wrote recently. “It should be embraced.”

The Fed, in a break from its historic focus on suppressing inflation, has tried since the financial crisis to keep prices rising about 2 percent a year. Some Fed officials cite the slower pace of inflation as a reason, alongside reducing unemployment, to continue the central bank’s stimulus campaign.

Critics, including Professor Rogoff, say the Fed is being much too meek. He says that inflation should be pushed as high as 6 percent a year for a few years, a rate not seen since the early 1980s. And he compared the Fed’s caution to not swinging hard enough at a golf ball in a sand trap. “You need to hit it more firmly to get it up onto the grass,” he said. “As long as you’re in the sand trap, tapping it around is not enough.”

All this talk has prompted dismay among economists who see little benefit in inflation, and who warn that the Fed could lose control of prices as the economy recovers. As inflation accelerates, economists agree that any benefits can be quickly outstripped by the disruptive consequences of people rushing to spend money as soon as possible. Rising inflation also punishes people living on fixed incomes, and it discourages lending and long-term investments, imposing an enduring restraint on economic growth even if the inflation subsides.

“The spectacle of American central bankers trying to press the inflation rate higher in the aftermath of the 2008 crisis is virtually without precedent,” Alan Greenspan, the former Fed chairman, wrote in a new book, “The Map and the Territory.” He said the effort could end in double-digit inflation.

The current generation of policy makers came of age in the 1970s, when a higher tolerance for inflation did not deliver the promised benefits. Instead, Western economies fell into “stagflation” — rising prices, little growth. 

Lately, however, the 1970s have seemed a less relevant cautionary tale than the fate of Japan, where prices have been in general decline since the late 1990s. Kariya, a popular instant dinner of curry in a pouch that cost 120 yen in 2000, can now be found for 68 yen, according to the blog Yen for Living.

This enduring deflation, which policy makers are now trying to end, kept the economy in retreat as people hesitated to make purchases, because prices were falling, or to borrow money, because the cost of repayment was rising. 

“Low inflation is not good for the economy because very low inflation increases the risks of deflation, which can cause an economy to stagnate,” the Fed’s chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, a student of Japan’s deflation, said in July. “The evidence is that falling and low inflation can be very bad for an economy.”

There is evidence that low inflation is hurting the American economy.

“I’ve always said that a little inflation is good,” Richard A. Galanti, Costco’s chief financial officer, said in December 2008. He explained that the retailer is generally able to expand its profit margins and its sales when prices are rising. This month, Mr. Galanti told analysts that sluggish inflation was one reason the company had reported its slowest revenue growth since the recession.

Executives at Walmart, Rent-A-Center and Spartan Stores, a Michigan grocery chain, have similarly bemoaned the lack of inflation in recent months.

Many households also have reason to miss higher inflation. Historically, higher prices have led to higher wages, allowing borrowers to repay fixed debts like mortgage loans more easily. Over the five years before 2008, inflation raised prices 10 percent. Over the last five years, prices rose 8 percent. At the current pace, prices would rise 6 percent over the next five years.

“Let me just remind everyone that inflation falling below our target of 2 percent is costly,” Charles L. Evans, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, said in a speech in Madison, Wis., this month. “If inflation is lower than expected, then debt financing is more burdensome than borrowers expected. Problems of debt overhang become that much worse for the economy.”

Inflation also helps workers find jobs, according. to an influential 1996 paper by the economist George Akerlof and two co-authors. Rising prices allows companies to increase profit margins quietly, by not raising wages, which in turn makes it profitable for companies to hire additional workers. Lower rates of inflation have the opposite effect, making it harder to find work.

Companies could cut wages, of course. But there is ample evidence that even during economic downturns, companies are reluctant to do so. Federal data show a large spike since the recession in the share of workers reporting no change in wages, but a much smaller increase in workers reporting wage cuts, according to an analysis by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. There is, in practice, an invisible wall preventing pay cuts. The standard explanation is that employers fear that workers will be angry and therefore less productive.

“I want to be really careful about advocating for lower wages because I typically advocate for the other side of that equation,” said Jared Bernstein, a fellow at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and a former economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. “But I think higher inflation would help.”

The Anchorage school board, facing pressure to cut costs because of a budget shortfall, began contract negotiations with its 3,500 teachers this year by proposing to freeze rather than cut wages. The final deal, completed last month, gives the teachers raises of 1 percent in each of the next three years.

Teachers, while not thrilled, described the deal as better than a pay cut. But it is likely, in effect, to cut the teachers’ pay. Economists expect prices to rise about 2 percent a year over the next three years, so even as the teachers take home more dollars, those dollars would have less value. Instead of a 1 percent annual increase, the teachers would fall behind by 1 percent a year.

“We feel like this contract still allows us to attract and retain quality educators,” said Ed Graff, the Anchorage school district superintendent.

In June, Caterpillar, the industrial equipment maker, persuaded several hundred workers at a Wisconsin factory to accept a six-year wage freeze. The company described the workers as overpaid, but it did not seek direct cuts.

The slow pace of inflation, however, minimizes the benefits. Seeking further savings, Caterpillar has since laid off almost half of the workers.


Don't you all see? We need official inflation of 6% (in real life, this will equal 15%) sustained, at a time of stagnant or declining real wages (IOW, deflation in wages) and massive unemployment/underemployment...

....This high inflation brought about by MOAR FED MONETIZATION OF MOAR DEFICIT SPENDING will cure all our ailments - just ask Japan.

Even if this theory of MOAR inflation = good was true, let's analyse the open advocacy of what the proponents of this are TRULY saying, which is actually MOAR WAGE DEFLATION GOOD;

"Inflation also helps workers find jobs, according to an influential 1996 paper by the economist George Akerlof and two co-authors. Rising prices allows companies to increase profit margins quietly, by not raising wages, which in turn makes it profitable for companies to hire additional workers. Lower rates of inflation have the opposite effect, making it harder to find work."

McWages FOR ALL!

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:57 | 4094444 schoolsout
schoolsout's picture

This isn't new news...this was talked about many months ago.  Surprised everyone forgot about it.  Many of the states that were not participating in the exchanges cited this rule as to why they aren't. 

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:26 | 4094476 MeMadMax
MeMadMax's picture

"Obama administration has no hope of repairing the glitch"

BS, Ochooma will find a way, even if he has to send in a Army of secret service/IRS/SWAT/whatever agents to enforce it...


Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:51 | 4094506 Wave Maker
Wave Maker's picture

This really is a problem for Obama.  The law defines state exchanges in a different section than federally facilitated exchanges.  It says that tax credits will be made available through exchanges created under section 1311, but federally facilitated exchanges are created under section 1321.  This was done as a hammer to induce states to set up the exchanges, but at the time, nobody dreamed the Supreme Court would make expanding Medicaid optional for states. 

I disagree that the courts will automatically disregard the wording of the law.  It is very clear.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 04:25 | 4094639 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

The law is also very clear in California, for instance, on securitization of promissory notes via deeds of trusts, and the procedures that need to be followed in order to perfect that security interest (like all other jurisdictions).

The courts have, thus far, automatically disregarded the wording of the law.

You're even more naive than me (and Brother, that's saying a lot) if you think the courts will follow the plain, black letter language of the statutes or precedent if doing so is going to affect their pensions, which it will. Boy, will it ever.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:50 | 4094767 GetZeeGold
GetZeeGold's picture





I would just like to ask.....what the hell is up with all the damn SWAT teams? Do we really need a SWAT team for the damn Boy Scouts?


Could we please send these SWAT teams down to the border where we could actually use them?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:53 | 4094768 Running On Bing...
Running On Bingo Fuel's picture

"rising wages help borrowers repay debts."

Problem is Biny, wages aren't rising and jobs are disappearing.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 15:16 | 4095590 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

Not that I or MANY of US aren't already convinced, but it's the illogic & basic, inherent contradictions in rational thought/analysis in articles such as this by Lame Stream Financial Media Outlets that will hopefully wake up more present day sheeple to the fact that it's Bastille Day Redux or permanent debt servitude.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 05:12 | 4094672 Offthebeach
Offthebeach's picture

Jant Reno is bring put in charge of enforcement.
You buy/get with the program, or else a SWAT team dynamic entry's your ass.
The health of Obamacare, the tax flow is too important for the health of FedGov.
Your health, not so much.
I would imagine if you have kids and don't participate, that it is child endangerment and they can taken from you after a dog killing raid.
Maybe some of us can be shipped on trains out to the Dakotas to New Model Obama Economic Zones.
Kids will be kept near capitals in shelters run by pervs, funded by perv pols.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 06:38 | 4094712 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Unlike many others, your shortcomings in  English proficiency are no hindrance.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 19:30 | 4096142 Lost Word
Lost Word's picture

More blackmail of the Supreme Court in order to overturn the rule of law and the Constitution, just as Obamacare was originally decreed "constitutional", and everything else Unconstitutional Fraud Obama has done.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 10:50 | 4095022 chemystical
chemystical's picture

The core of the problem (and frankly that of most problems of any import that the USSA faces) can be discerned by a review of the persons named in the news item:

Ben Bernanke, Binyamin Applebaum, Janet Yellen, Kenneth Rogoff, Alan Greenspan, George Akerlof, Jared Bernstien.

Let the ad hominems fly.  You have a better chance of winning the lottery twice in one day, then being struck by lightning, then attacked by killer bees, then attacked by a shark, then being killed by terrorists, than for the kohencidence of co-religionists at the center of problems: orchestrating, benefiting from, 'debating' both 'sides' in the occupied media, offering solutions for, ad fucking nauseum.  matter of time till everyone else wakes up.

<blinders off>

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 05:02 | 4094669 trader1
trader1's picture

thank you.  

a few days ago, i made the same comments (albeit harshly) with data and multiple sources to back it up.

 why the hell did i get junked into oblivion?  

ZH commenters are bipolar.


Sun, 10/27/2013 - 06:50 | 4094721 trader1
trader1's picture

how cute, two junks so far.  i've attracted a hater fan base ;-)

must be a bot,

or some of you east coast playas' first thing to do is visit the ZH comments section between 5-6am on a sunday morning,  

or we have some late night west-side playas with nothing better to do than junk and run the ZH board.  

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 11:56 | 4095142 lunaticfringe
lunaticfringe's picture

If you want to whine, there is always Huffpo.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 14:31 | 4095511 trader1
trader1's picture

not whining.

just excited that i've attracted a fan club.  

operation mindfuck continues ;-)

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 10:09 | 4094958 flyme
flyme's picture

You are aware that those tax rebates are only paid to those who are working - have paid tax / have taxable income - and filed a return. Many of the poor, or those who live on nontaxable income  file no tax return, since they have no taxable income. Therefore neither will not qualify for any insurance rebate. Many will be ineligible for this rebate, just as they were/ are ineligible for earned income tax credit.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 16:10 | 4095707 object_orient
object_orient's picture

Not true. You don't have to file a tax return to get subsidized health insurance. However, if you don't buy any and don't file a return, the IRS will have a hard time collecting the fine.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:00 | 4094366 rbg81
rbg81's picture

Guess someone forgot to read the law to find out what was in it before they passed it--eh?

That being said, Obama will just issue an Executive order to do whatever he wants.  If a court shoots him down, the ruling will be ignored 'cause it MUST be racist.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 03:56 | 4094632 Killer the Buzzard
Killer the Buzzard's picture

Bush's fault.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 05:49 | 4094683 Balanced Integer
Balanced Integer's picture

Andrew Jackson ignored the Supreme Court's ruling to stop the Cherokee removals. Guess Obama has some precedent of his own to go by, ironic as that would be.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 12:56 | 4095255 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Ah the storied history of populist politicians crimes against humanity.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:37 | 4094422 Wahooo
Wahooo's picture

Doesn't obamacare outlaw high deductible plans? If so would it outlaw itself?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:28 | 4094311 max2205
max2205's picture

You ever hear of executive orders...or dictator orders... You vill obey

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:33 | 4094321 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

The federal tax subsidies vis-a-vis the ACA are doled out by Congress as the exclusive branch of government that is able to appropriate funds.

An executive order can not possibly force Congress to turn over the power of the purse to the Executive Branch.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:55 | 4094360 bh2
bh2's picture

That echoes sentiments of one opinion quoted in the article:  "[t]his is a question of whether you believe in the rule of law."

I think we know whether strict legality will even momentarily interfere with the pleasure of this administration to do as it pleases. Mr. Holder will stand and deliver whatever "interpretation" is required. Done deal. Next.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 04:10 | 4094642 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

No one believes in the rule of law. We have now imported sufficient people who come from systems governed by the 'el Jefe' (sp?) rule that America exists no longer.

Get used to it.

In California, there are 139 government employees and welfare recipients for every hundred in 'the private sector'.

Hey! Let's have an election!

I wonder how that's going to turn out? (Actually, I don't have to. I can ask Diane Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, and Barbara Boxer. And Henry 'Nostril' Waxman. And about, oh, say, about 139/100ths of the other elected officials - and remember, it's a winner take all system.)

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:57 | 4094362 DeadFred
DeadFred's picture

In the old reality that would be true but we aren't in Kansas anymore. The case will be sent to a judge that the NSA has ample dirt on and the executive order will be upheld. All your expectations for justice need to be sent to an even higher authority.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 01:03 | 4094521 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

It worked on John Roberts the first time, why wouldn't it work again?

After all, that's the problem with blackmailers. If you pay them off the first time, they just keep coming back.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 06:52 | 4094727 lakecity55
lakecity55's picture

"Mr Bath House, you must invade Syria."

"No. When the winds of shift change I will aside with the Muslims."

"We will release these photos (throws on desk).

"NO! They show me with a..a.. Woman! And having....Sex with her! These have been photoshopped, you bastard."


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:29 | 4094408 Make_Mine_A_Double
Make_Mine_A_Double's picture

So Supreme Court ruled ACA is not a 'tax' if I remember correctly. Than isn't it against word and deed to get a Fed 'tax' credit?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:02 | 4094448 TruthInSunshine
TruthInSunshine's picture

The opposite.

The Robert's decision held it was effectively a tax, while upholdng the ACA.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:59 | 4094718 Oracle 911
Oracle 911's picture

Well one thing is sure, the federal government is forcing buying health insurance at private companies.

It is similar to system, which were established in some European countries (like the Czech republic or Slovakia) where you are taxed by state (meaning paying for social security) and you can choose between companies whom providing health insurance, similar system was established in the pension system.


Now this is the situation, while the system similar to Obamacare/ACA system somehow works in these countries (it works more then not),  the Obamacare will fail even in form of single payer system.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 19:49 | 4096188 Lost Word
Lost Word's picture

Except tax legislation must originate in the House of Reptiles,

and Obamacare legislation originated in the Senate.

Thus Unconstitutional.

Par for the course, for Obama.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:03 | 4094857 Race Car Driver
Race Car Driver's picture

It was 0bama who swore it wasn't a tax. Roberts then had to say it was in order to make it stick.

Is a tax, isn't a tax ... it doesn't matter. Just give us your fucking money and no one gets hurt today.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:19 | 4094579 Freddie
Freddie's picture

Congress is a joke.  Harry Reid makes sure Obama gets whatever he wants.  It is all about looting now and has been since O stole two elections and the elites gave us no real choice.  It is all a joke now.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 04:14 | 4094643 MisterMousePotato
MisterMousePotato's picture

Freddie, my friend? Obama didn't steal two elections:

Yes, the electorate really is that stupid.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:12 | 4094872 sleigher
sleigher's picture

You have to remember that the options the first go around were Osama, or Mcsame and Failin.   At least the second time around we had Gary Johnson as the lib but he still didn't get 1%.  There is no choice.  When you look at things this way you start to see that maybe elections aren't fixed as much as we might think they are.  They are fixed in that we only get shithead #1 and shithead #2, they are both the same shithead however.  From there it matters not who is elected.  

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 15:37 | 4095589 Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

Precisely! And that is why I wonder how some of our Zero Hedge compatriots can still be mired in the counterproductive belief that anything would be better or different if their preferred team were in charge. It is a sad waste of energy that could be better spent in something more productive. Jesse Ventura compared the two parties to professional wrestling, and I think it is an apt enough analogy with good guys and bad guys, a loud and crass entertainment with imaginary rivalries. At the end of the day our representatives, wallowing in their privileges, all go out together for drinks and laughs (at our expense), but they are all employed by the same company. Only the most determinedly naive and those unfortunates unable to exercise any form of critical thought (and I concede there are many of these) can buy into this ludicrous travesty. Some other entity is in charge, and our government no longer belongs to us or exists for our benefit and is actively starting to view us as the enemy. 

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 11:46 | 4095120 noless
noless's picture

I feel like someone pointed out that the recent continuing resolution contained language which did just that, can't remember who now though.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:56 | 4094441 RafterManFMJ
RafterManFMJ's picture

Wait, Obama actually said that? He said the word, banana? LOL!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 10:54 | 4095030 franzpick
franzpick's picture

What GoBomb'em said was: "If anyone doesn't understand that we are Top Banana then we're going to have a problem".

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:03 | 4094267 max2205
max2205's picture

Looks like a ray of hope. Hope the ray isn't extinguished by THE DARK FORCE.....

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:01 | 4094373 udaman
udaman's picture

nice try

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:03 | 4094270 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

Obamacare is a big enough clusterfuck that it's probably going to repeal itself.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:25 | 4094306 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

I am unaware of any government program that has self-repealed due to failure.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:28 | 4094313 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

The New Deal undid itself.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:35 | 4094325 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Really?  How so?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 01:22 | 4094519 NidStyles
NidStyles's picture

None of the programs were fully funded and few of the regulations could even be enforced, and then later the Supremes had a field day with invalidating the whole thing. This is when the socialists in the US started adopting the Fabian style that was all the rage in England.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 13:08 | 4095280 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Not the whole thing. A lot of it is still with us. The NRA got the axe by the supremes, but FDR threatened them effectively not to get uppity and sweep out so much else that was evil in FDR and Congress progressivist fascist innovating.

Remember: this was the epoch when the supremes gave the Feds the right to regulate non commerce occurring entirely within a state under the power to regulate interstate commerce. Got that? Re read. We have been deep in the rabbit warren since then.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:35 | 4094328 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

It was a facetious way of saying I would bet that Obamacare is such a spectacular failure that it grinds the medical insurance industry to a halt and pisses off quite a few sheep. 

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:42 | 4094339 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

Ah, OK.  I see now.  If that's the case, I STILL DISAGREE.  The law was DESIGNED TO DO EXACTLY THAT.

Zero has already said openly he wants single-payer.  This law MUST be a disaster to lay the foundation for transformation into a single-payer system.  It is a spectacular success in that respect, not a failure.


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:00 | 4094370 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

That may be what Obama wants, but it will mean that Congress looses out on quite a bit of campaign donations from insurance providers.  On top of that, there's still the issue of pissed off sheep.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 01:06 | 4094526 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Well, I guess that means they have to engineer the kind of crisis that will bankrupt the insurance industry.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:11 | 4094572 El Vaquero
El Vaquero's picture

Which this will do if left unchecked, however, I'm pretty sure the insurance companies knew what was in it before it was passed.  So, how much money would have thrown at congress if they had thought it would blow up in their faces?  While the end result may, in fact, be a single payer system, I don't buy that it was the original intent (discounting Obama's intentions here) simply because of the whole money-congress angle.  Although, I do admit, there would be a lot more clarity if we knew the names and affiliations of the people who actually wrote the fucking thing.  I haven't searched very hard, but I did look a little bit, and did not find that information.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 03:19 | 4094609 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Did you see the "senior executives" of the Health Insurance industry they sent up to Capital Hill? All those Muppets needed was an excel spreadsheet saying they would receive x million sign-ups and the math would work... and then they bought in hook line and sinker (with a thousand pages of a lobbying obfuscation).

But those spreadsheet assumptions are predicated on people actually buying private insurance at the insane costs that the new "system" demands. The fact that people would either "pay the fine" or go medicaid, instead of buying private insurance was obvious to any with more intelligence than one of their "senior executives" who actually read the damn bill.

They missed for the forest for all the trees they were busy planting. And regardless of Obama's intellectual incapacity, they had enough wicked smart people working on this (e.g Rahm) that "they" certainly knew that they would be delivering Obama's wet dream gift-wrapped in misdirection. The question is how far down from the top, and into the organs that allow faux-Team B to function do "they" extend?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 11:14 | 4095058 franzpick
franzpick's picture

My surgeon's office was SRO last week and the verification lady said they were all pre-existing condition patients now covered under ObamaScare.  Do the insurance companies have loss reserves to cover this tidal wave of losing policies?





Sun, 10/27/2013 - 14:11 | 4095460 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Not if they have been paying dividends or buying back shares, perhaps they should consider getting a banking license, although that move worked far better for GS than AIG.

So their policy will be cancelled next year when the company is no longer willing to participate in the exchange, at which point everyone will be on medicaid (and they might not even need to raise eligibility depending on how much of the economy they can break in the interim)

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:04 | 4094567 TheReplacement
TheReplacement's picture

Well you know what they say, bah.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:05 | 4094455 object_orient
object_orient's picture

Will that single payer be the government or United Healtcare? It's hard to imagine Obama singlehandedly destroying the private health insurance industry.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:56 | 4094601 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

There is difference between a Zero and his legions of mental midgets. The design of the system guarantees the destruction of the private health insurance industry. The retards of the organized labor movement got their panties in bunch when they realized that their cadillac plans *may* be taxed out of existence. However, if an insurance company can't sell health insurance profitably, it won't, and with no private insurance industry the Unions will all get Nigger Care and they will be told to like it. Trumka may understand what's going on, but if the rank and file understood that they were about to lose their health insurance entirely, do you really think they would have picked so much cotton to get Zero re-elected?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 03:55 | 4094630 Rock On Roger
Rock On Roger's picture

Ha, Nigger Care

Fuck Niggers

Stack On






Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:13 | 4094738 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Who is getting treated like a nigger in that sentence and why?

Until the dumbing-down of the electorate and the ego-inflations of the politicians reached the absurdity of Romneycare & Obamacare, government boondoggles weren't named after the fools misguiding the ship of state. How's that .gov issued Johnsoncare or Bushcare doing for you? Perhaps "sheeple care" or "retard care" would have been more polite, but such polite words fails to capture the true disdain that TPTB have for the citizenry, or reflect the more strategic aim of the program, which is to get the field niggers back on the .gov plantation where they belong.

As to pompous ass-clown behind the careless destruction of huge segments of US economy and civil rights, he is most certainly either 1) a nigger (if he actually is learning about his administrations fuck ups from the TV) or 2) a traitor (in which case he should be Mussolini'd - but we know how many American retards wouldn't understand the correct context of such an action).

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:14 | 4094394 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 You're a shill!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:49 | 4094500 Freddie
Freddie's picture

The USA has no real laws.  It is a total scam. A police state.   Obama, the DEMOCRATS, and RINOs are pushing amnesty now.  Unless the House conservatives hold and remove Boehner then the USA is over.  Time to start *****it***** up because USA Inc. a corporation where corporations are people and the real people are serfs. 

Keep drooling in front of your TV and Hollywood dumb f**king sheep.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:01 | 4094374 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

Fuck OFF! 

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:09 | 4094388 Chuck Walla
Chuck Walla's picture

Cue Obama: "I didn't write this law, international justice wrote this law."

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:36 | 4094418 patb
patb's picture

I'm not sure if anyone has standing to litigate, other then perhaps the GOP House.


So it would mean that individuals can't sue, what are they supposed to say "I am harmed because

the feds are giving a great deal on taxes"?

The states have no standing. what are they supposed to show their standing is?

Only the congress has standing because they can argue this goes against congressional intent.

So Boehner is going to lead a lawsuit to snatch away tax credits from people in 36 red states.  Wow,

the ads just write themselves.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:01 | 4094565 Mac1492
Mac1492's picture

What happened to Marla DJ nights?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 02:08 | 4094570 Mac1492
Mac1492's picture

This thing called Obama care was set up to fail... In 16 months the fucking repubs will loose the house and in within 3 years the ultimate plan of total control of healthcare provided by the federal gov will be in place... My advice sit back stack some gold and drink some fine ass bourbon

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:24 | 4094797 Pizza man
Pizza man's picture

Spot on, NoDebt. I have come to the conclusion, we need to fire 85% of the GOP and 95% of the Dems. But it ain't gonna happen.  Not untill we clean DC Transyvania style. With pitch-forks, torches and a wood stake. OWS, those useful tools, should have been in DC. That's how you tidy up Wall Street cronyism.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:20 | 4094399 GoldForCash
GoldForCash's picture


Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:12 | 4094785 Truthseeker2
Truthseeker2's picture

Here's the REAL SCOOP on Obamacare!

"Obamacare: The Hidden Agenda"

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 13:51 | 4095411 Chewybunny
Chewybunny's picture

From what I recall, wasn't the trust that people had in the American government institution back in the early half of the 20th century a hell of a lot more greater than it is today? Surely there were dissidents, as there are always dissidents, but I recall most people at least believed the intention either for or against was in good faith towards the American people?


Now we have the internet, mass communications, absolute distrust of the government (as all recent polls have shown), suspicion, etc. It won't be easy to hide this, and I doubt that people would be as complacent as they were back in the 40s and 50s...


Then again, I still have optimism for the American people...

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 16:52 | 4095774 robertsgt40
robertsgt40's picture

I expect an Executive Order any day now to "solve" da glitch

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:41 | 4094238 icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

>This is a question of whether you believe in the rule of law

I think he will find that Washington DC does not so believe.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 07:08 | 4094735 edotabin
edotabin's picture

"This is a question of whether you believe in the rule of law"

Please put this down as one more of the horseshit catch phrases that have been crammed down the throat of the people.  People make laws and while it may not be as bad as the king waking up, farting and deciding to execute someone, it is still pretty bad.

Here's my saying about the law that I find a bit more accurate:

"The law is nothing more than the will of the most powerful party at any given time."

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:47 | 4094243 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture

They've got John Roberts in the bag over his homosexuality, but might be interesting to get a Supine Court delay.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:23 | 4094403 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

More like, they threatened his kids career health. Or their physical health, then his wifes, then his.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:37 | 4094421 patb
patb's picture

who nominated Roberts?



Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:06 | 4094453 RafterManFMJ
RafterManFMJ's picture

I shouldn't post this but many years ago, I got lost in DC and as I stopped in Fort Marcy Park I noticed a guy in a suit blowing a homeless guy!

I got closer to ask for directions and was surprised to see the 'man' on his knees was John Roberts! I was even more surprised to see him pay the homeless man 50 bucks.

In the distance I saw a cow legged ugly woman and what looked like Bill Clinton carrying a rolled up carpet. I got the F out of there, pronto!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 13:53 | 4095418 Chewybunny
Chewybunny's picture

Seems like a perfect Halloween Spooky Story!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 01:11 | 4094531 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Roberts is a fag, but nobody cares about that anymore. Roberts illegally adopted his kids from Ireland, and "laundered" them through South America. If the Irish were made aware of this, Irish law would require the kids to be removed from Roberts and repatriated.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 14:03 | 4095444 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Where did this meme come from?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:47 | 4094244 LetThemEatRand
LetThemEatRand's picture

Who hates lawyers now?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:53 | 4094253 holdbuysell
holdbuysell's picture

How many years has this finally read the !#@$!@# bill?


And because it never gets old, here's the next-to-be-fired-servant of the people:

"We Have to Pass the Bill So That You Can Find Out What Is In It"

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:08 | 4094277 philipat
philipat's picture

It ceases to be a "Bill" when it becomes a Law. But you are right in that, either way, nobody read the!#@!@#er. Except, of course, the Health Insurance Lobby who actually wrote it.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:43 | 4094340 iLiquid
iLiquid's picture

I love it how ZH converted that into a mail address.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:08 | 4094778 Running On Bing...
Running On Bingo Fuel's picture

Me too. It's magic. Exceptional feature. Nice.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:10 | 4094459 object_orient
object_orient's picture

We have these comments "the Health Insurance Lobby who actually wrote it"

and these "Obamacare is gonna fail on purpose so we get single payer etc. etc."

So, which is it? Insurance lobbyists didn't craft legislation that will blow up their industry and livelihoods, right?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 09:48 | 4094621 philipat
philipat's picture

The Health Insurance lobby wrote a Bill which will expand BOTH their volume AND their margins, whilst giving back a few crumbs.

It is entirely the fault of the Obama administration that they spent almost 1 Billion dollars to develop a website that doesn't work, which is aka in the private sector as incompetence. But such is the way of Government because there is no responsibility or accountability. I, as I'm sure many readers also, have built many websites for 1-2K. Oh, and they do actually work.

The next problem with ACA, which is again beyond the control of the Health  Insurance lobby, is the penalty aspect, which again can only be made by Government. Young people will NOT enroll because the cost is too high so they will pay the penalty instead. The Health insurance lobby had assumed that the penalty structure would be such that the young would be forced to join, but it isn't that at present. With the young not enrolled, it is the old, sick and those with pre-existing conditions whio will enroll and the costs will go through the roof. Many others will be directed into Medicare and Medicaid. So who is going to pay for all that? We do, in case you hadn't noticed, have a quite large budget deficit already.

My best guess is that the Government will then force young people to join by increasing the penalty to close to the annual premium which, given the escalation as a result of the above, they will not be able to afford so will still not enroll. Next step? More personal bankruptcies and more private prisons for TPTB to make more money from?

This legislation was ill-conceived from the outset and has been implemented very badly, in terms of both strategic structuring and tactical implementation. The only contradiction is that the Private Health Insurers had no idea that the final legislation and its implementation could be so badly screwed up.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 13:34 | 4095358 icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

Insurance lobbyists wanted a policy reset so they could charge everyone new, higher rates. They got it, big time.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 03:26 | 4094613 Urban Redneck
Urban Redneck's picture

Reading a bill and fully understanding its consequences are two very different things. Building a website is actually far EASIER than understanding a legislative bill, because for each line of code on the website (cause) there is a clearly verifiable effect, whereas, the effects of laws, are subject to pseudo-sciences of human behavior.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:22 | 4094299 e_goldstein
e_goldstein's picture

"We have to pass it, so we can know what's in it."

Fuck you Pelosi. Glad something finally came back to bite you in your arrogant moronic ass.


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:30 | 4094318 Dr. No
Dr. No's picture

"We need to spend more to keep from going broke"
"we need to borrow more so we can pay our bills"

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 21:59 | 4094261 CunnyFunt
CunnyFunt's picture

"They are betting on getting five votes at the supreme court".

I'm betting on improving my fitness and not getting sick. My booze bill has already decreased significantly.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:02 | 4094265 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

Obamacare is already sunk in my house, law be damned.........

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:04 | 4094271 One And Only
One And Only's picture

We need that free contraception in the inner cities so they stop breeding.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:36 | 4094312 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

The breeders don't use contraception.  What incentive is there from a financial perspective for them to have FEWER children?

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:17 | 4094396 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

  The breeders don't use contraception. "Until they need your insidious help?"

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:28 | 4094409 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Planned parenthood got started to cut down on inferior childbirths. Margaret Sanger was a fan of eugenics back in the early days of progressivism in America, before the little Austrian even got going. . They've been very successful with their program

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:53 | 4094440 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

  I don't trust NoDebt. Period.  FWIW when I was much younger I impregnated a woman, and against my better judgement aborted the child.

 To this day I regret it!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:13 | 4094462 object_orient
object_orient's picture

You really should have had a doctor do the deed. Then the blood on your hands would only be figurative.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:25 | 4094472 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Do have an opinion regarding usd/jpy? I'm looking at the PeNikkei vs the usd/jpy and thinking Noda might be getting concerned?

  Those treasury yield spreads are getting ugly vs JGBs' ?  Who am I to have an opinion?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:28 | 4094479 object_orient
object_orient's picture

You seem to be having a rough day. Good luck trading and have a better tomorrow. Cheers!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:34 | 4094487 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 The truth hurts. I did some research. This isn't about trading. Relax!

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:13 | 4094788 Running On Bing...
Running On Bingo Fuel's picture

You're the best at circular thought. In a previous life you must have been a dog who chased her tail with vigor.

Kind regards.


Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:04 | 4094272 TyrannoSoros Wrecks
TyrannoSoros Wrecks's picture

As we saw with SCOTUS, no court will ever overturn this. The courts are owned and run by the enemy now.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 05:12 | 4094666 Element
Element's picture



The courts are owned and run by the enemy now.

You mean to say the 'Rocket Docket', pro-bankster, foreclosure-judges of Florida, are everywhere now?


Invasion of the Home Snatchers:


Florida Foreclosure Rocket Docket 2.0, Banking Fraud and Government Corruption - How Much Will The US Economy Suffer When The World Realizes The Game Is Rigged?


You may be on to something.

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 08:33 | 4094791 Running On Bing...
Running On Bingo Fuel's picture

I think the reference refers to the `Sunstein` infiltration
(--> Legal philosophy)

Legislate 'favor' for the lizards by the lizards.

See Trampy below:

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:04 | 4094273 a growing concern
a growing concern's picture

Maybe someone should have proofread the law to find out what was in it before they passed it.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:16 | 4094286 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Isn't that why Lawfirms hire "paralegals"? (and interns)

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:20 | 4094291 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

We had to pass it to find out what was in it. Remember............??

Now we're finding out.......

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:21 | 4094295 therevolutionwas
therevolutionwas's picture

quicks draw McLunatic!

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:34 | 4094323 NoDebt
NoDebt's picture

I assure you the details of the law were WELL known by those who really wrote it.  It was only kept shrouded in mystery because to reveal it's contents BEFORE it's enactment (and irreversible implementation) would have meant it's death.

DO NOT THINK NOBODY KNEW WHAT WAS IN IT.  They were well aware.  It was INTENTIONALLY obscured by all sides.  Now it doesn't matter.  The revealing of it's true ugliness won't stop it's implementation any more.  It's too late.

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 23:00 | 4094371 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Perhaps you'd like to hire the reading retards to decipher "Odungacare"?

Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:17 | 4094465 object_orient
object_orient's picture

So who wrote the damn thing? Healthco lobbyists or single payer sabateurs?


Sun, 10/27/2013 - 00:37 | 4094490 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 You're kidding? The whole argument is about who wrote the Obunga care program. All 28,000 pages of it<

Sat, 10/26/2013 - 22:19 | 4094293 therevolutionwas
therevolutionwas's picture

Nah, we had to 'pass it in order to find out what's in it.'

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!