If the Democrats weren't going to put these assurances into the law then Obama shouldn't have repeated the promise dozens of times in dozens of speeches. They could have put grandfather clauses into the law so that people could keep their doctor/plan, but refused to do so.
The Democrats crafted this law in back rooms. They forced votes on it without giving anyone time to read the massive law. When Ted Kennedy died and they lost their supermajority in the Senate, they pushed this massive law through a reconciliation process instead of going through the standard vote process. Not a single Republican voted for this law. The Democrats had to make deals with centrist Democrats (the LA purchase, Cornhusker kickback) just to get enough votes to scrape it by. After it went into effect and the lies were noticed ("if you like your dr you can keep your dr"), Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) could have amended the law to fix it but he refused to do so. Yet somehow it is the Republican's fault???
I don't see Taylor Swift hurting for cash either. In my opinion, "popular" musicians have been overpaid relative to what value they add to society for quite some time. I won't shed a tear because Taylor Swift doesn't get paid millions for her latest "music".
Can you imagine the ramifications if the American people actually got fed up enough with both parties to elect a 3rd party candidate as the President? The Democrats and Republicans would suddenly be falling on themselves to appease "the people" again. All it would take is one presidential election to change the game for decades. If only enough Americans would get the balls to do it.
Not sure who is really the "boss" in that situation.
The path Zuckerberg took is much harder today because of people like Zuckerberg. The most common programmer path today consists of being a barely adequate developer from a 3rd world country who is willing to come here and work 70 hrs per week for less money than American developers. You don't have to be all that great of a developer and you certainly didn't have to play video games.
Everyone loves taxes when it is someone else paying them.
I believe this is just political posturing before they sign the bill to substantially increase the number of H1Bs. Now they can say that they "attempted" to punish companies who violate the rules of the H1B program.
"This letter is a significant development in this contentious issue. It arrives at the same time that lawmakers are pushing a substantial increase in H-1B visas under the I-Squared bill, legislation that would raise the H-1B cap. Two of the co-sponsors of the I-Squared bill also signed the letter asking for an investigation into H-1B program practices."
There is a pretty big distinction between providing service to someone and being forced to participate in an action that you find morally reprehensible. See if you can spot the difference:
A black baker is forced to attend a KKK rally to cater it.
A black man is forced to bake a cake for a KKK member that will be used at a KKK rally.
I agree. Estimates aren't a problem for teams that understand what "estimate" means. It isn't exact. It can't be exact. As long as you respect it for what it is, then it is a powerful planning tool.
The next time a business person gripes about estimates not being accurate enough, ask him/her to estimate (to the minute) how long it will them to drive home during rush hour traffic. When they start complaining about how an unexpected accident would cause the estimate to be very inaccurate, then a light bulb will go off.
Obama promised (many times) that the "Affordable" Care Act was supposed to LOWER the premiums of the average household by $2500. If the goal was to force everyone to have more coverage and pay higher premiums, then that could have been done with a much much more simple law.
The smart cards coming by Oct 2015 will also contain a chip that will provide a unique token for each transaction.
"The biggest challenge however is one that both Apple and Google face: Only a small fraction of the 10 million or so retail outlets in the U.S.–220,000 at last count–have checkout readers that can accept payments from either system."
That's not the biggest challenge. The biggest challenge is that it is no more convenient or reliable to pay a bill with my smartphone than it is with a credit card. My credit card doesn't run out of power. And I don't have to worry about it not getting a good connection inside a store. And I don't have to worry about pulling out a $500 phone and juggling it around every time I want to pay for something.
By Oct 2015 most banks will be issuing smart credit cards that make it much harder to commit fraud. Some of them will come with NFC and support "tap to pay' just like a smartphone. But they will be much cheaper and much more reliable.
Paying by smartphone is a solution in search of a problem.
Walmart can't haul me out of my bed in the middle of the night for questioning. Amazon can't use a drone to kill me without due process. Microsoft would get shut down if they spied on people as much as the NSA.
The government has power over a person's freedom, privacy, and very life. Therefore, they MUST be drastically limited in power and completely transparent in all that they do. The people who founded this country understood that concept.
Obamacare REQUIRED insurance policies to cover conditions that were not previously required (ex: maternity care for a 60 year old woman). It also forced insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions that weren't covered before. It also forced insurance companies to cover young adults on their parents' policies. All of these policies HAVE gone into effect and have increased premiums.