Quoted from benny salami

If Obama makes coal unprofitable it must be Bush's fault. The poor are suffering the most under Obama. Take a look at the lines at the Food Pantry.
But don't fret. Obama has a plan. Make the evil rich pay for Obamacare. Yeah, that's the ticket. Biden in 2016. Keep the implosion going.

Quoted from Tommy

They're all just using it as an excuse to raise prices even more than is necessary to cover Obamacare, and make a political statement at the same time.

Papa Johns, said it would raise their cost of the "pizzas" by 12-17 cents, yet they are raising the price by 50 cents.

Denny's, is saying that they'll have to raise their prices by 50 cents, or cut employee hours.
They're doing both.

The guy with the coal mine is a douche bag also.
Electricity demand is not going down, which he blames on Obama, and isn't a bad thing, but rather, demand is going up.
He's selling less coal, because more and more industries are switching to cheaper more efficient fuels, like gas.
But sure, blame it on your employees, and Obama.

Fact is, none of these "job creators" employ anybody, unless it is to make them money.

Quoted Text

New mandate to buy insurance: Starting in 2014, individuals must be insured or pay a penalty.
The amount of the penalty rises annually from 2014 to 2016 and is adjusted for inflation thereafter.
In 2014, the penalty will be no more than $285 per family or 1% of income, whichever is greater. In 2015, the cap rises to $975 or 2% of income. And by 2016, the penalty would be up to $2,085 per family or 2.5% of income, whichever is greater.
The dollar amounts for a single adult would be $95, $325 and then $625 during that same time period.
However, the penalty couldn't exceed the national average premium of the lowest cost policy on the new health insurance exchanges.
There are also a number of exemptions. For instance, the penalty will be waived for people with very low incomes who don't have to file a tax return, members of certain religious groups, or people who face insurance premiums that would exceed 8% of family income even after including employer contributions and federal subsidies.
For more on how the mandate works, check out this flow chart from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
New tax on high-cost employer plans: Starting in 2018, insurers of employer-sponsored plans -- or companies that self-insure their own plans -- will be subject to an excise tax if their plan cost tops $10,200 for individual coverage and $27,500 for family coverage. (Thresholds are higher for plans covering retirees and workers in high-risk jobs.)
The theory is that the so-called "Cadillac tax" will encourage companies to choose lower cost plans, and that will free up money to pay workers higher, taxable wages. That, in turn, boosts revenue paid into federal coffers.

Quoted Text

Higher threshold on medical deductions: Currently, if your medical expenses exceed 7.5% of your adjusted gross income, you may deduct the amount above 7.5%. Starting next year, however, you will only be allowed to deduct the amount above 10% of AGI.
That increase, however, is waived for tax years 2013 through 2016 for anyone 65 and older.

Quoted from GrahamBonnet

can we get pizza from China perhaps? It will only cost 2 dollah

Quoted Text

The river that DID run red: Residents of Chinese city left baffled after Yangtze turns scarlet
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new.....t.html#ixzz2CUm9BCNd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Quoted Text

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Health insurers will dole out a total of $1 billion in rebates to 12.8 million Americans this summer -- an average of $151 per family --as a result of the 2010 health care reform law, the government said Thursday.
The rebates announced by the Department of Health and Human Services come from a provision of the law that punishes insurers who spend too much of policyholders' premiums for boosting company profits instead of paying for their medical care.

Health insurance rebates by state

However, it's unclear if insurers will have to issue rebates at all if the Supreme Court strikes down all of the health care law.
The court, which is reviewing the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, is expected to issue its ruling later this month. The court could uphold the law, overturn it partially or completely strike it down.
HHS spokesman Keith Maley said the agency was confident that the law is constitutional.
"We are focused on ensuring the benefits of the law are applied to Americans across the country, including ensuring consumers get value for their premium dollar," he said.
See average health insurance rebates by state
The rule mandated that, beginning in 2011, insurance companies would have to spend 80% to 85% of the premiums they collect on medical care instead of toward their own profits and overhead costs.
"The rule helps ensure consumers get fair value for their health care dollar," HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, said in a statement.
Exchanges could survive even if health reform law dies
Insurers that didn't increase that allotment to the new federal standard would have to give customers a rebate for the difference beginning in 2012.
HHS said insurance companies that failed to meet the required "medical loss ratio" must provide a rebate for the difference to their customers no later than Aug. 1.

For families who buy their health insurance out of pocket, the average rebate is expected to be $152. In the small group insurance market, where many small businesses buy insurance for their workers, the average rebate per family is expected to be $174, the agency said.
Large companies that insure employees themselves will have to pay out an average rebate of $135 per family if they fail to meet the rule, HHS said.
3.1M young adults gained health coverage since law took effect
HHS said consumers owed a rebate could get it as a check in the mail, a lump-sum reimbursement to the same account that they used to pay the premium if by credit card or debit card, or as a reduction in their future premiums.
For affected policyholders who are insured through their employers, their companies could provide them with the check or reimbursement, or employers could apply the rebate in another manner that benefits their employees, the agency said.

Quoted Text

Human Beings Are Getting Dumber, Says Study

By JuJu KimNov. 15, 201231 Comments
      
inShare
19

GETTY IMAGES
RELATED

Are Humans Getting Intellectually and Emotionally Stupid? Smithsonian.com
Email Print Share  Comment
Follow @timenewsfeed
Just look at all the amazing innovations modern technology has given us: at-home HIV tests, motion-activated screwdrivers and self-inflating tires. It’s easy to look down on our prehistoric ancestors for their primitive, electric screwdriver-less way of life. But one scientist says we shouldn’t be so quick to judge.

In a two-part paper published in the journal Trends in Genetics, Stanford University researcher Gerald Crabtree suggests that evolution is, in fact, making us dumber — and that human intelligence may have actually peaked before our hunter-gatherer predecessors left Africa.

(MORE: Creationists Boycott Dr Pepper Over ‘Evolution of Flavor’ Ad)

The reason? Life on the veldt was tough, and prehistoric humans’ genes were constantly subjected to selective pressure in an environment where the species’ survival depended on it. For humans, that meant getting smarter. ”The development of our intellectual abilities and the optimization of thousands of intelligence genes probably occurred in relatively non-verbal, dispersed groups of peoples before our ancestors emerged from Africa,” Crabtree said in a news release.

The urbanization that followed the development of agriculture simplified survival by removing some of its challenges, which likely weakened natural selection’s ability to eliminate mutations associated with deficiencies in intelligence. Crabtree estimates that over the last 3,000 years (about 120 generations), humans have sustained at least two mutations that have eroded our intellectual and emotional intelligence.

“A hunter-gatherer who did not correctly conceive a solution to providing food or shelter probably died, along with his or her progeny, whereas a modern Wall Street executive that made a similar conceptual mistake would receive a substantial bonus and be a more attractive mate,” Crabtree wrote in the paper. He also noted that the average Athenian from 1000 B.C. would rank among the smartest and most emotionally stable in today’s society.

Not everybody agrees with Crabtree’s reasoning, however. Steve Jones, a geneticist at University College London, believes there is insufficient data to support his theory. ”Never mind the hypothesis, give me the data, and there aren’t any,” Jones told The Independent. “I could just as well argue that mutations have reduced our aggression, our depression and our penis length, but no journal would publish that. Why do they publish this?”

Crabtree does argue that no matter how deteriorated our intellectual abilities may have become over the millennia, advancements in technology will someday render these changes insignificant.

“I think we will know each of the millions of human mutations that can compromise our intellectual function and how each of these mutations interact with each other and other processes as well as environmental influences,” Crabtree said in the release. “At that time, we may be able to magically correct any mutation that has occurred in all cells of any organism at any developmental stage. Thus, the brutish process of natural selection will be unnecessary.”



Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/.....umber/#ixzz2CUr2TOXV

Quoted Text

CharacterQuote
Mal
This is the source?
Unknown
This ship's banged up all to hell.
Dr. Caron
These are just a few of the few images we've recorded.
And you can see...
it isn't what we thought.
There's been no war here...
and no terraforming event. The environment is stable.
It's the Pax.
The G-23 Paxilon Hydroclorate that we added to the air processors.
It was supposed to calm the population, weed out aggression.
Well, it works.
The people here stopped fighting.
And then they stopped everything else.
They stopped going to work...
they stopped breeding, talking, eating.
There's 30 million people here, and they all just let themselves die.
Unknown
I have to be quick.
About a tenth of a percent of...
the population had the opposite reaction to the Pax.

Quoted from Tommy

If coal becomes less profitable, then you'd better look at hydrofracking, not any president. Gas is much easier, and cleaner to use.
Throw in cheaper, and coal is all but dead.

Electricity made the oil lamp industry unprofitable, but it was outdated, as is coal.