JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - TOKYO - late-March start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
-
- Assistant Language Teacher - Kanagawa Prefecture - late-March start
- Interac, Kanagawa
- Salary: ¥230,000 ~ ¥255,000 / Month
-
- Part Time Assistant Language Teacher - Kanagawa Prefecture - late-March start
- Interac, Kanagawa
- Salary: ¥9,000 / Day per 4 class shift
0
Laguna
And those parents are quite welcome to opt out of what is an option. What you seem to be advocating is for the religious to have the ability to extend their prohibitions to those who do not share their beliefs.
Middle an upper class people are able to afford birth control out of their own pocketbook, but the underclass, for whom even regular doctor visits are rare, are the ones who will be most affected by this. It really has nothing to do with religion at all but with seamless regulation. Creating an exemption is akin to hacking off a hydra head: This group now, this procedure next, and soon the intent of the law is gutted.
Legality implies definition, and you would be thankful for this when it comes to things like "health insurance." Imagine a world in which your employer offers health insurance that covers everything but anything requiring a blood transfusion because of his religious beliefs. That is the slippery slope that the Republicans are pushing us towards.
Options do not require that subscribers utilize them. Organizations which oppose certain medical practices are welcome to educate their employees about these issues and to council against them, but as long as these practices remain legal in society, organizations are not entitled to withhold what society through its government has deemed is a citizen's due.
Posted in: Top Republican wants vote on birth control mandate
0
Laguna
Reading some of these comments, it appears some believe government thugs will storm defenseless Christians' houses and force birth control down their throats.
A bill put forward by some Republican bandwagon-jumper would allow any entity, whether religious-affiliated or not, to opt out of the birth control mandate if it offends their religious sensibilities. Really, the next logical step would be to allow for any entity to opt out of any medical mandate if it offends any religious sensibility.
Go ahead and foam at the mouth while you can on this issue, though - it'll be buried and forgotten two or three fourtnight, mark my words.
Posted in: Top Republican wants vote on birth control mandate
0
Laguna
Not in the minds of many Republicans, which is why federal law prohibits spending on abortions even though the procedure is entirely legal.
Requiring all Americans regardless of political belief to pay for birth control for federal employees was overwhelmingly okey-dokey for them because the rabid right had not yet made that their focus; now, requiring the same benefits for a janitor cleaning floors or nurse attending patients at some Catholic-affiliated megahospital is suddenly a veritable attack on religious freedom and the Constitution itself.
It's the sheer transparency of their hypocrisy that is galling, Sail. This is the crisis du jour, a moral tempest in a teacup that will be as forgotten as February's snow in August once something new comes along for them to seize.
Posted in: Top Republican wants vote on birth control mandate
0
Laguna
All Obama needs to do to make Republicans flip-flop is to advocate a position they hold. Look at the Libyan intervention: Republicans were "severely" for that type of thing until they were suddenly equally severely against it. Or the insurance mandate: Republicans for years portrayed this as a tenant of individual responsibility until Obama agreed; now they portray it as an attack on personal liberty.
In 2001, six Republican senators proposed a bill requiring that health insurance plans not “exclude or restrict benefits for prescription contraceptive drugs or devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration.” While that bill was ultimately not adopted, in the same year, the GOP-led Congress passed appropriations bill which included a mandate that federal employee health insurance plans include contraception and birth control coverage by a vote of 334-94, including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor; this bill was enacted by Bush, who is apparently not Obama, as Cantor then certainly would have been against it very, very severely.
It's gotten so bad that some Republicans are even staking out positions contrary to their own state laws; twenty-eight states have for years required birth control be covered by health insurance with few or no exceptions, including New Hampshire, but this did not prevent one of the Granite State's senators from claiming, “It violates our First Amendment to the constitution. This is not a women’s rights issue. This is a religious liberty issue.” Sen. Ayotte, you might want to check in with your state legislature first.
Hey, I have two teenage children (and I was once a teenager myself), so I am no stranger to rejection as mindless rebellion; I just do not trust a political party that acts in such a way.
Posted in: Top Republican wants vote on birth control mandate
-1
Laguna
Nice post, Triumvere. One can imagine the high-fives being exchanged in the Oval Office at this idiocy.
Posted in: Top Republican wants vote on birth control mandate
0
Laguna
Well, once again, Sail, we find ourselves at a difference of opinion that no tag-team of Web-based article citing is going to resolve. Leveling the playing field for insurance, providing certainty through legislation, allowing insurance portability for employees - these should do wonders for the small businessman. I am self employed and pay a bit north of 600,000 yen yearly for health insurance for my family of four - about half of what I would pay in the US. I really don't think I could do there what I do here and still insure my family.
It is true that health care in the US is a mess, and it got there through the free market, not through government regulation. Republicans would say that the way out is to double down on what has not worked before. Obama offers a different approach, one that takes a step towards systems used in most advanced countries, including Japan.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
0
Laguna
Sailwind, predictions are all over the map. Here is one from RAND which includes two major conclusions:
and:
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1008047
Granted, the reforms are only the first step towards expanding coverage while containing costs. Some would suggest that the status quo is acceptable - but the status quo is what brought us to the dismal place US healthcare is.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
0
Laguna
Sailwind - it matters not who bears the news. The Republican record of obstructionism in the Senate is public record no matter who reports the news.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
0
Laguna
Thanks for pointing out how insurance companies are gouging their customers, Sailwind - another reason why we need the private option!
The New York Times says:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/business/health-insurance-costs-rise-sharply-this-year-study-shows.html?pagewanted=all
So they seem to be raising rates now simply because they can. The new health care regulations will be phased in in stages over five years; the resulting package will, many think, make the old system seem so bad that people will "cling" to it like they do to Social Security. This is what Republicans are afraid of and is why they want to stop it before people come to like it.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
1
Laguna
Used to live in Maine - it's a strange mixture of Democrats and libertarians. The latter were a bit hard to deal with: they strongly distrust people "from away" but are loathe to do without Federal assistance (Maine gets $1.41 for every dollar it sends to Washington).
Still, that Romney won by such a slender margin is really not a win at all: Maine used to be part of Massachusetts and still follows their lead in most things, so it is Romney's backyard. More wins like this and he's a goner.
Posted in: Romney's presidential bid gets boost with Maine win
0
Laguna
You know quite well that a president's greatest responsibility is to protect the interests of the United States. Obama voted against the war, and he should be given credit for seeing it through to a credible conclusion.
Some have memory either short or selective (or both). Filibusters burst through the roof with the election of a Democratic Senate as Republicans prevented most anything from coming to vote - a pattern that still continues. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/01/the-rise-of-cloture-how-gop-filibuster-threats-have-changed-the-senate.php
The GAO expects Obama's health care plan to actually save the government money - but then, some don't trust the GAO when it states things they don't like.
The Federal Government is not a business: expenses do not disappear just by shoving them off the balance sheet. The uninsured cost society overall vastly more than they would if society would simply insure them to encourage preventive health treatment; similarly, the cost of cleaning up after the terrible human toll an automotive company bankruptcy would have wrought would have vastly exceeded the money the government lost saving the companies.
You don't seem to understand the point of the graph, which was ADDITIONAL spending; the 126 was that added on to the existing defense budget; from this year, the existing budget will be steady or decrease slightly.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
0
Laguna
Shocking but entirely expected. It's a wonder that with so much money she failed to purchase the support she so clearly needed; that those surrounding her must have been so enamored of the money and fame that they failed to take her best interests into consideration.
Posted in: Whitney Houston dead at 48
-1
Laguna
Skipbeat, this has been said before, but perhaps you missed it.
Total debt added by a president is less important than the debt added by that president's policies. Bush over eight years instituted unfunded policies totaling over $5 trillion; Obama halfway through his presumed eight years is less than a third of that at under $1.5 trillion.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/the-chart-that-should-accompany-all-discussions-of-the-debt-ceiling/242484/
A major reason the deficit exploded under Obama (aside from obvious effects of a recession, lower tax revenues and higher social spending, both automatic) is the continuation of the disastrous Bush policies. These are no fault of Obama.
Posted in: Obama budget: New spending with recycled tax ideas
1
Laguna
sailwind, wouldn't you consider the American healthcare market over the past 50 years governed by market forces? Has that brought down prices at all? Many economists have analyzed this: the health care market does not act like regular markets. It is extremely inelastic. It is dominated by natural monopolies. Its effects spill over from the personal to the public good in huge ways. And its providers (insurance companies) and purveyors (healthcare providers) are at natural odds - the former profiting from denial, the latter from provision.
DS says, "Tying health insurance to employers has always been a mistake." Most Democrats would agree, but would take it a step further: the people banding together through a government-organized initiative - the "public option" - is the most efficient, economically rational way to provide a decent level of health care to all people.
And, sailwind, remember that it is an unusually lucky insurance recipient to be "over-covered." The very purpose of government regulations in this area is to insure that companies do not shortchange their employees by providing "insurance" that is useful only in very rare cases. Private insurance companies, after all, employee large amounts of people to make sure that this is so. So much for "private industry" efficiency.
Posted in: Obama compromises on birth control policy
1
Laguna
Sailwind, you are wrong there. What would be prohibited is for companies to unilaterally determine what coverage is and is not acceptable; individuals are free under Obama's health plan to shop for coverage that they feel suits them best. That - along with the ability to compare cost - is the whole point of the insurance exchanges to be set up.
Posted in: Obama compromises on birth control policy
1
Laguna
Thank you, Sailwind - that is exactly my point. A citizen may opt out of participating in certain social activities but not from paying for what society through its elective representatives has determined is best for the country. True, representative democracy has enabled multitudes of horrors throughout American history including slavery and unjust war, and there are times when civil disobedience is required - but what is being sought in this case is not civil disobedience, it is legal exemption. Taking such logic further, I would be within my rights to withhold the portion of my tax dollars which would go to the Pentagon et. al.
This is really not a street that any party, Democratic or Republican, would be wise to start down.
Posted in: Obama compromises on birth control policy
2
Laguna
I myself am religiously opposed to violence in any form and am quite against my taxes being used to fund the military-industrial complex. I'm sure I'm not alone in wanting an opt-out of THAT "mandate." Society, though, does not allow us to pick and choose; I vote for leaders who will cut the military as much as possible and accept the results.
To enjoy the benefits afforded by living in a democracy while at the same time shirking responsibility is shameful cowardice. The Council of Catholic Bishops has recognized this by accepting Obama's face-saving proposal. The question is whether certain Republicans will follow suit - or whether they will milk an exceptional hot-button item for their own benefit. Listening to the response from Gingrich:
does not give one much hope. Funny enough, this eruption of right-wing vitriol will most likely end up helping Romney within a few weeks as its insanity becomes clear.
Posted in: Obama compromises on birth control policy
0
Laguna
paulinusa, as Ayler said, eye contact from a macaque is in itself generally the final step before a teeth-and-clawed bare lunge of inner-city, not suburb, type. It seems that the macaque is standing, deprived of an advantageous leaping position - and that is probably the only thing that saved this tourist.
Posted in: Getting warm
0
Laguna
So the adverbs have finally begun creeping out of the woodwork. While knowledge of how conservative a candidate might be, I fear escalation. "Viciously conservative," "barbarously conservative," "untamedly conservative" - heck, might as well go with "radically conservative" as there's really no reason anymore to pretend to even want to make sense.
Posted in: Republicans pitch selves to conservative gathering
-1
Laguna
Wait - how does this work? Initially, employers were to be mandated to provide birth control to employees, but now they will only have to do so if the employee asks? This sounds like a very nuanced compromise indeed.
Posted in: Obama compromises on birth control policy