THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: BenRG on 02 Feb 2020, 02:17

Title: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 02 Feb 2020, 02:17
A random idea randomly came to me and I decided to run with it!

We've been focussing a lot of Faye, Bubbles, Roko and May of late with a little side trip into the first sighting of a French pastry in Tairaville. However, there are plenty of characters that we haven't seen for a while. Who would you like to see come back, either as a cameo or as a sustained arc?
Tell me your ideas below!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 02 Feb 2020, 06:18
Other: Raven. 'cuz... Raven.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Dngrsone on 02 Feb 2020, 10:09
Charlotte, the prankful sales AI at Idoru... she was so fun and enthusiastic.  Though Iris at the Apple AnthroPC store is nice too... she likes hugs.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: hedgie on 02 Feb 2020, 11:06
You might want to fix the poll.  It's Beatrice Chatham.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 02 Feb 2020, 17:44
Oh geeze, I had to look up who Penny is/was.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: hedgie on 02 Feb 2020, 18:24
She’s pizza girl
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 02 Feb 2020, 18:31
Brun and Clinton would be cute.  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Dngrsone on 02 Feb 2020, 19:12
Brun and Clinton would be cute.  :-D

But what about Elliot?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Penquin47 on 02 Feb 2020, 19:52
Other: Sven and his intern Lydia (no longer an intern, I'm sure), Marigold/Dale, Gabby.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Carl-E on 02 Feb 2020, 19:57
Looks like Brun it is! 


Ummm... that's the kind of bruising you get with a fracture...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Scarlet Manuka on 02 Feb 2020, 22:52
Ummm... that's the kind of bruising you get with a fracture...
It's all right though. She got extra money for that...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 02 Feb 2020, 23:25
Oh ouch, Brun! Girl, you need to look after yourself a lot more. I also think that you should be less averse to making appearances at the emergency room! That looks pretty ugly! Seriously, it could just be soft tissue damage but it might not be, if the keg was airborne. Those things are heavy, made of thick metal and would cause damage!

I'm sort of scared that Renee is right and that Brun should just simply not be left around anything that can have an explosive or incendiary element to its catastrophic failures!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 03 Feb 2020, 02:20
Other: Sven and his intern Lydia (no longer an intern, I'm sure), Marigold/Dale, Gabby.

I saw Renee and mistook her for Gabby at first!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Killspree on 03 Feb 2020, 05:04
I hope that's just some soft tissue bruising and not internal damage.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Stoutfellow on 03 Feb 2020, 06:23
Brun? That last payment is called "hush money".
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: NemesisDancer on 03 Feb 2020, 06:34
Jimbo, Penny, and Raven are all characters I'd like to see again :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: pwhodges on 03 Feb 2020, 07:09
Who's been gone longest?  Sara, that's who - do you seriously believe the story about being eaten by an allosaurus?  She's out there somewhere, possibly even secretly stalking the original target of her lust!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 03 Feb 2020, 07:33
I hope that's just some soft tissue bruising and not internal damage.
Same here.

The longer the bruise takes to show up, the deeper the tissue damage is. So here's hoping it's just minor since it already looks like that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: JimC on 03 Feb 2020, 09:42
Perhaps we need a visit from Claire (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1716) to check Brun out for curses...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Roborat on 03 Feb 2020, 12:37
What a coincidence, I was just wondering how Brun was doing and when we would see her again.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Carl-E on 03 Feb 2020, 12:52
How about the guy who runs the liquor store across the street from the church (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=717)? 


Nevermnd.   :-D
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 03 Feb 2020, 13:34
Jeph seems to have remembered that his comic was actually once about humans more than robots, and decided it was a good idea to check in on some of the organic characters.  :-P
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 03 Feb 2020, 13:57
How about the guy who runs the liquor store across the street from the church (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=717)? 


Nevermnd.   :-D
That’s Cerenkov radiation. The rest of the comic since then is the hallucinations of Marten, dying from the radiation exposure.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 03 Feb 2020, 14:29
Beer explosions are a thing. Usually on the bottle/can level though. I can't imagine how a bar could host an explosion strong enough to send a keg flying.

Renée is right to be concerned. Brün should get that looked at.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: hedgie on 03 Feb 2020, 14:59
Maybe it was something like that Lovecraftian beer, but with fewer tentacles.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 03 Feb 2020, 15:44
I hope Brun actually saw a doctor...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Mr_Rose on 03 Feb 2020, 16:44
I hope Brun actually saw a doctor...
Unlikely. For a start she only just got home. Next, she just doesn’t seem likely to have considered it as a possibility based on her past actions. Finally and most importantly, doctors cost money and even with bonus pay and compensation I doubt Brun has the ability to afford one since she probably also doesn’t have medical insurance, just like she had no idea about renter’s insurance.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 03 Feb 2020, 19:18
Next one's up too.

Awww.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 03 Feb 2020, 20:35
How about the guy who runs the liquor store across the street from the church (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=717)? 


Nevermnd.   :-D
That’s Cerenkov radiation. The rest of the comic since then is the hallucinations of Marten, dying from the radiation exposure.

#CheerfulPhysics
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 03 Feb 2020, 20:53
Jeph seems to have remembered that his comic was actually once about humans more than robots, and decided it was a good idea to check in on some of the organic characters.  :-P
Or he wanted to leave off the previous arc at a good save point and this has been simmering on a back burner for a bit.  (¬_¬)

EDIT: typo fix
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 03 Feb 2020, 21:04
Faye had health insurance working at a coffee shop, so it's possible Brun's employer provides it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 03 Feb 2020, 23:12
One thing that Jeph now has to address is how long Elliott has been habitually hovering around Brun like a worried parent every time anything happens with her. It has to have been a while if Renee knew that Elliott would be coming over sooner or later to check her out (and I do mean that in both meanings).

It must be difficult for Renee though. Remember that she's attracted to Elliott herself. It must be hard for her to watch him crushing on her roommate (even if only in his adorably non-self-aware manner). Still, she has enough ironic humour in her to make the best of it!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Thrudd on 04 Feb 2020, 06:16
The Roombas. Why? Just because.

Also would be cool if they revealed that they got a speech module upgrade on top of their flight capabilities.
Who would they be interacting with? Well Melon of course. Oh and harassing Pintsize with his latest project.  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: dutchrvl on 04 Feb 2020, 06:55
Looks like Brun it is! 


Ummm... that's the kind of bruising you get with a fracture...

Oh, I've had a bruise like that before after landing right on my hip/thigh during squash. The immediate pain is usually a pretty good indication of how bad it actually is. For me the pain was not that bad, but the bruising looked like I should be in the ER or at least close to dying....

Since she has walked home seemingly without being in much pain, Brun appears to be ok.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Feb 2020, 08:26
Usually, perhaps, certainly not always. I had so much of an adrenaline load when I broke my shoulder that I had no idea it happened until I discovered I couldn't lift my arm.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: thedevilissix on 04 Feb 2020, 10:11
Who's been gone longest?  Sara, that's who - do you seriously believe the story about being eaten by an allosaurus?  She's out there somewhere, possibly even secretly stalking the original target of her lust!

Maybe Sara is Pizza Girl.



WHOAG THE VORTEX IS INITIATED  :evil: :psyduck: :-D

NO-ONE SUSPECTS THE BUTLER  :evil:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: thedevilissix on 04 Feb 2020, 10:13
The Roombas. Why? Just because.

Also would be cool if they revealed that they got a speech module upgrade on top of their flight capabilities.
Who would they be interacting with? Well Melon of course. Oh and harassing Pintsize with his latest project.  :-D

I’m weirdly imagining them all zooming up in a fleet to Melon and singing Boyz II Men love songs to her. ‘Tis the heart day month after all.  :-D
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: dutchrvl on 04 Feb 2020, 12:48
Other: Raven. 'cuz... Raven.

This would be great, but it seems Jeph has written her out permanently and transferred some of the usable genius-qualities to Emily instead.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: dutchrvl on 04 Feb 2020, 12:55
A random idea randomly came to me and I decided to run with it!

We've been focussing a lot of Faye, Bubbles, Roko and May of late with a little side trip into the first sighting of a French pastry in Tairaville. However, there are plenty of characters that we haven't seen for a while. Who would you like to see come back, either as a cameo or as a sustained arc?
  • I'd like to know how Jeremey and Seven are doing running the Fighting Arena;
  • The fact that Marten hasn't picked up his guitar in a while, just what is Amir doing with himself now?
  • Did Beatrice even care that her daughter has ostracised her? Or does she have a cunning plan?
Tell me your ideas below!

Do we know for a fact that Marten hasn't played guitar in a while? I don't recall any instance in which it was mentioned. I suppose it was hard when Hanners was away, but now that she's back I kinda assumed they are practicing regularly again.

Speaking of which, Hanners was brought back very briefly but we haven't seen much at all since she got back. Kinda surprising since I kinda assumed he brought her back to have an arc....

Also, Tilly? I would be okay with some having a trip to the station and seeing John, Tilly, Abby again. 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: dna_level_c on 04 Feb 2020, 14:20
Do we know for a fact that Marten hasn't played guitar in a while? I don't recall any instance in which it was mentioned.

Perhaps not in a band situation, but I would guess he gets some solo practice in. My last band broke up in 2003 and I still play (almost) every day.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: alc40 on 04 Feb 2020, 18:35
When Hannelore had just returned it sounded like Marten hadn't been playing for quite a while (4057 (https://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=4057)).  I don't think we know whether anything has changed or not since then.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 04 Feb 2020, 19:05
New strip up.

"You okay? Good, I'm drafting you to carry stuff."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: rtmq0227 on 04 Feb 2020, 22:22
New strip up.

"You okay? Good, I'm drafting you to carry stuff."

"Clever girl..."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 04 Feb 2020, 22:31
That was the strip, yup.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 04 Feb 2020, 23:04
I think that today's strip is a nice Renee character summary. She cares for her friends, yes. She has the ability to express this in a positive way. She's also got the potential to be very self-centred and really seems to have issues in always showing respect for others' agency (she's shown this behaviour to Brun too).

It's curious because she's never really rude or offensive about it. She just has this blind spot about what you can and cannot just ask a friend to do and how to go about it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 05 Feb 2020, 00:43
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 05 Feb 2020, 01:58
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.


Box full of possums minus o

;)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Feb 2020, 05:12
Here's a thought about what could happen going forwards:

Renee and Brun's new apartment is in the building where Roko, Melon and Yay-Athleisure live. Elliot, being Elliot, is easily coerced into helping Renee move and runs into Roko and Yay. Roko's police instincts quickly latch onto the fact that Renee had basically used Elliot's essentially agreeable and submissive nature against him to get his help and she can't help but interfere. Yay decides that this is another way to prove their essentially friendship-worthy nature to Roko and also interferes.

Renee suddenly finds that the world is stranger than she ever imagined.

RENEE: "So, they're basically the robot equivalent of the devil?"

ROKO: "Closer to Puck or Loki really."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 05 Feb 2020, 05:56
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.


Box full of possums minus o

;)

Pssums?  :-P
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Elder Sign on 05 Feb 2020, 08:43
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Mr_Rose on 05 Feb 2020, 09:51
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Yes, when the radioactive atom decays, it determines whether the box contains an opossum or a possum. Of course if the atom starts screaming incoherently, the box turns out to have been holding a bandicoot instead.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: hedgie on 05 Feb 2020, 10:23
Are bandicoots related to Discworld's Greebo?

 "Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 05 Feb 2020, 12:37
Hm.

I'm loathe to trigger another avalanche of Renee-hatred ... but I'll allow myself to say that I feel unenthused about some of her persistent behaviours, and her persistent failure to modify them.

It's time for her to grow.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 05 Feb 2020, 13:00
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Yes, when the radioactive atom decays, it determines whether the box contains an opossum or a possum. Of course if the atom starts screaming incoherently, the box turns out to have been holding a bandicoot instead.

Nope, quantum superposition only works with kets, not possums ...  :clairedoge:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Pilchard123 on 05 Feb 2020, 13:03
Maybe Renee-growth is what this arc will be about.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 05 Feb 2020, 14:45
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Yes, when the radioactive atom decays, it determines whether the box contains an opossum or a possum. Of course if the atom starts screaming incoherently, the box turns out to have been holding a bandicoot instead.

Nope, quantum superposition only works with kets, not possums ...  :clairedoge:
Until Faye’s bra teleports onto Marigold, that is. (Not going to try to find that one on my phone)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 05 Feb 2020, 19:35
Maybe Renee-growth is what this arc will be about.

As we've switched away (again) apparently no.

That was very AWWWW. And yeah, it makes sense that Bubbles is very much about keeping ethical boundaries and such....
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: NetQC on 05 Feb 2020, 20:49
Oof, that one hit hard. Had exact same situation with my ex, except he got super mad at me "lying" to him and was rude to me for days as "punishment".

Seeing Faye and Bubbles develop healthy relationship standards is so nice.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 05 Feb 2020, 21:01
Bubbles is killing it in that yellow dress.  I suspect that it has an origin story that I have forgotten.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 05 Feb 2020, 21:09
1) The strip is set in Massachusetts.  Brun (and Faye) should have been covered under Romneycare.

2) When I voted "other" in the poll I was thinking of Cossette.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Feb 2020, 21:16
Oof, that one hit hard. Had exact same situation with my ex, except he got super mad at me "lying" to him and was rude to me for days as "punishment".

Seeing Faye and Bubbles develop healthy relationship standards is so nice.

Welcome, new person!

It's especially nice to see given how traumatized each one has been. That they are working through their pain to build something healthy is inspiring.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: SeattleCrochetWoman on 05 Feb 2020, 21:18
1) The strip is set in Massachusetts.  Brun (and Faye) should have been covered under Romneycare.

2) When I voted "other" in the poll I was thinking of Cossette.

Seems like they would have been covered. But didn’t Dora say she wasn’t going to take Faye off the insurance or something right away so that her hospital stay for alcohol poisoning would be covered?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 05 Feb 2020, 21:19
1) The strip is set in Massachusetts.  Brun (and Faye) should have been covered under Romneycare.

2) When I voted "other" in the poll I was thinking of Cossette.

Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it. It's not "everyone is covered" as is believed, it's a requirement that you have it or you can't get your state taxes back. That's it. It's intended to get you to be covered, but doesn't provide for everyone in the state. The state is a master of manipulating the truth, she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Feb 2020, 23:13
To me, this strip is mostly about Faye and just how insecure she is in emotional terms. There is a part of her that genuinely believes she is worthless and is always on the lookout for early warning signs that she's going to be abandoned. It's what really killed her relationship with Angus (although there were other big factors in there, most of which were not from her) and she's still having to constantly fight them.

Of course, Bubbles has her own self-esteem issues and it's lovely in lots of ways watching the two of them take reassurance from each other. It's really clear that they both want this to work and it's good that they're both making an effort to understand each other.

Bubbles is killing it in that yellow dress.  I suspect that it has an origin story that I have forgotten.

The skirt is quite short (at least on Bubbles), ending about mid-thigh. I find myself wondering if she's also wearing leggings or pants; I think it would work so long as the colour matches.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 06 Feb 2020, 00:52
Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it. It's not "everyone is covered" as is believed, it's a requirement that you have it or you can't get your state taxes back. That's it. It's intended to get you to be covered, but doesn't provide for everyone in the state. The state is a master of manipulating the truth, she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.

I won't lie. I did not understand a word of this.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Nighthawk700 on 06 Feb 2020, 01:48
Errr, now I'm worried... the way the light is shining on Faye and Bubbles in the last panel... isn't that what happened to Roko just before her incident with Crushbot?  https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3900   (note, I'm not on Paetron or any of those "see a strip a day before" services, so just conjecture on my part)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Feb 2020, 01:54
Errr, now I'm worried... the way the light is shining on Faye and Bubbles in the last panel... isn't that what happened to Roko just before her incident with Crushbot?  https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3900   (note, I'm not on Paetron or any of those "see a strip a day before" services, so just conjecture on my part)

Don't worry; Jeph always puts this 'soft lens' effect on when two characters are being particularly romantic and in love.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: fearless_fool on 06 Feb 2020, 03:20
Gotta say: I love the extreme perspective of Faye in the next to last panel of #4194.  More camera angles!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: St.Clair on 06 Feb 2020, 05:34
I like that Faye acknowledges that it's "dumb", i.e., irrational; but the heart knows not reason. :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Wingy on 06 Feb 2020, 05:38
I hope Brun actually saw a doctor...
Unlikely. For a start she only just got home. Next, she just doesn’t seem likely to have considered it as a possibility based on her past actions. Finally and most importantly, doctors cost money and even with bonus pay and compensation I doubt Brun has the ability to afford one since she probably also doesn’t have medical insurance, just like she had no idea about renter’s insurance.
Plus she doesn't like doctors.  If that bruise was the impact point, she could have a cracked pelvis (note: cracked, not broken).  That will take a long time to heal given Brun's job as a bar back.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 06 Feb 2020, 05:48
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Yes, when the radioactive atom decays, it determines whether the box contains an opossum or a possum. Of course if the atom starts screaming incoherently, the box turns out to have been holding a bandicoot instead.

Nope, quantum superposition only works with kets, not possums ...  :clairedoge:
Until Faye’s bra teleports onto Marigold, that is. (Not going to try to find that one on my phone)

The benefits of a solid scientific education: The ability to make puerile puns about felines and womens' undergarments while claiming to be educating the lay public about the concept of the dual space ...  :angel:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Feb 2020, 05:56
Let's not even get into the name that the book for my classical mechanics class used for the canonically-transformed Hamiltonian...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: TieDyeKat on 06 Feb 2020, 06:24
Well butts. Jeph gave me the diabeetus.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 06 Feb 2020, 09:14
Quote from: BenRG .
[quote author=flondrix link=topic=34564.msg1438469#msg1438469 date=1580965315
Bubbles is killing it in that yellow dress.  I suspect that it has an origin story that I have forgotten.

The skirt is quite short (at least on Bubbles), ending about mid-thigh.
[/quote][/quote]

Is that not a common occurrence for tall women?  Anyone here who can speak from personal experience?

Aaaand I have screwed up the quotes.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 06 Feb 2020, 09:50
1) The strip is set in Massachusetts.  Brun (and Faye) should have been covered under Romneycare.

2) When I voted "other" in the poll I was thinking of Cossette.

Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it. It's not "everyone is covered" as is believed, it's a requirement that you have it or you can't get your state taxes back. That's it. It's intended to get you to be covered, but doesn't provide for everyone in the state. The state is a master of manipulating the truth, she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.

Does Massachusetts run a health insurance program that has to take everybody, even sick people?  Or is it "we require you to have health insurance, even if no one will insure your sick ass"?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2020, 09:54
Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it. It's not "everyone is covered" as is believed, it's a requirement that you have it or you can't get your state taxes back. That's it. It's intended to get you to be covered, but doesn't provide for everyone in the state. The state is a master of manipulating the truth, she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.

I won't lie. I did not understand a word of this.

That is a common reaction when people hear about the American health insurance system.

Romneycare is just Obamacare at the state level.

If your employer doesn't provide health insurance as a benefit, the only way to get it is to buy it yourself or to be poor enough to qualify for indigent health care. Buying it yourself is cost-prohibitive and Mass. does not enough to subsidize the purchase.

Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.

So it's advertised as universal coverage but if you work as a bar back you might get stuck in the middle between being poor enough for state-funded insurance and being rich enough to buy a private plan.

Is that at least comprehensible, even if it doesn't make sense as policy?

QC Massachussetts must be a little different from ours if a small coffee shop can afford to buy health insurance for employees. Maybe QC Romneycare has a generous subsidy for small business to buy insurance.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Drunken Old Man on 06 Feb 2020, 10:41
The answer to the poll...the only POSSIBLE answer...is Boo-Boo.
https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=763
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 06 Feb 2020, 11:32
QC Massachussetts must be a little different from ours if a small coffee shop can afford to buy health insurance for employees. Maybe QC Romneycare has a generous subsidy for small business to buy insurance.

In QC Massachussetts, all those employed AIs have to pay taxes (they're gettting paid a salary, after all) and are required to either buy "health insurance" or pay the penalty, but since no "health" plan covers their repairs they opt to pay the penalty.  This helps subsidize the health care of slacker humans.
Title: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 06 Feb 2020, 11:49
Is that not a common occurrence for tall women?  Anyone here who can speak from personal experience?

Aaaand I have screwed up the quotes.
My wife is quite tall (though not as tall as Bubbles) and yes, this does happen to her.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 06 Feb 2020, 12:25
Let's not even get into the name that the book for my classical mechanics class used for the canonically-transformed Hamiltonian...

Wich one did you use - Goldstein? (My class used Kuypers, but methinks that one not so well-known in the Anglosphere)

Asking for a friend Science ...  :angel:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: SeaWoodStage on 06 Feb 2020, 12:30
I'm not tall (about 5'7" - 5'8" depending on the measuring), although I've always felt slightly taller than average for a woman in my country, and it's always bugged me a little bit. I don't like being taller than other people in general, it makes me feel even more awkward than I usually do in social situations.

The last time I went shopping for a dress, I saw one and thought "oh this looks nice!" I picked my size, went to try it on, and thought "I'm sorry, is this a dress or a top?" It barely covered my bum. I suspect it is the curse of any woman to go shopping and find that nothing fits them properly. Clothes for women seem, in the last decade, to have been designed for some imaginary beings who bear no resemblance to any woman alive on this planet today.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 06 Feb 2020, 14:37
Box full of opossums?
Box full of opossums minus one.

Box full of possums minus o

Schroedinger's box of opossums?
Yes, when the radioactive atom decays, it determines whether the box contains an opossum or a possum. Of course if the atom starts screaming incoherently, the box turns out to have been holding a bandicoot instead.

Nope, quantum superposition only works with kets, not possums ...  :clairedoge:
Until Faye’s bra teleports onto Marigold, that is. (Not going to try to find that one on my phone)

The benefits of a solid scientific education: The ability to make puerile puns about felines and womens' undergarments while claiming to be educating the lay public about the concept of the dual space ...  :angel:

And all of this because I wanted to say "Oh, that's where Pintsize got the 'possum from!".

All of this is "When the fiction from science fiction makes real life science more fun!"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Feb 2020, 14:53
Let's not even get into the name that the book for my classical mechanics class used for the canonically-transformed Hamiltonian...

Wich one did you use - Goldstein? (My class used Kuypers, but methinks that one not so well-known in the Anglosphere)

Asking for a friend Science ...  :angel:
Goldstein. I double checked after posting that, and it’s listed in the index, though on the page the index points to it only calls it that in the footnote.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Bollthorn on 06 Feb 2020, 15:06
That last panel is so sweet and wholesome ^_^
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 06 Feb 2020, 15:10

Nope, quantum superposition only works with kets, not possums ...  :clairedoge:
Until Faye’s bra teleports onto Marigold, that is. (Not going to try to find that one on my phone)

The benefits of a solid scientific education: The ability to make puerile puns about felines and womens' undergarments while claiming to be educating the lay public about the concept of the dual space ...  :angel:

And all of this because I wanted to say "Oh, that's where Pintsize got the 'possum from!".

All of this is "When the fiction from science fiction makes real life science more fun!"

'Kets' (spoken like 'cat') and 'bras' are actual 'things' in quantum theory (the state-vector and its so-called 'dual'). Got zip to do with felines or underwear - it's a reference to notation for certain concepts from the field of functional analysis (or rather: The notation convention physicists use. Mathematicians use a different one, which makes joint conferences all manners of unfun).

Kets looks like this: |a>, while bras are written as their mirror-image: <a|. In order to calculate (the absolute square of) the probability of the system going from one state called a to another state called b, you 'apply' the 'bra of b' to the 'ket of a'.

Which is written as a bracket, like this: <b|a>. Bra-(c)ket, see?


Goldstein. I double checked after posting that, and it’s listed in the index, though on the page the index points to it only calls it that in the footnote.

Ohnoes - The footnote on p370?  :facepalm: Yeah, that pun must not be made.

My thesis advisor was one those guys to prove the Sheldon Cooper stereotype: Incredibly fast on the uptake, really 'over-clocked', but the sense of humour of a pre-schooler. And he strangest thing was that he didn't realize. He considered himself high-larious. Made group meetings agonizing - you didn't want him to feel awkward, but the jokes that man cracked ... that shit wasn't funny. Not cruel or anything, simply not funny at all.

Anyhow, that one in Goldstein could have been one of his.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 06 Feb 2020, 16:18
Sorry, for those of us who don't have access to Goldstein, what is the pun in the footnote on page 370?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 06 Feb 2020, 16:54
Sorry, for those of us who don't have access to Goldstein, what is the pun in the footnote on page 370?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 06 Feb 2020, 17:19
Oh dear ...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 06 Feb 2020, 17:49
I still wanna see Bubbles in a tux.
Mint Chocolate Chip is never a mistake.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tyr on 06 Feb 2020, 18:19
The answer to the poll...the only POSSIBLE answer...is Boo-Boo.
https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=763
Why not Princess Spookyspell (http://"https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1896")?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 06 Feb 2020, 19:30
Well, I still don't know who Princess Spookyspell is, but now I have discovered https://jephjacques.soup.io/
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: St.Clair on 06 Feb 2020, 21:25
Winslow's chassis is not scorpion-tight, let alone water-tight, so he wouldn't remain buoyant for long.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 06 Feb 2020, 22:13
Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it. It's not "everyone is covered" as is believed, it's a requirement that you have it or you can't get your state taxes back. That's it. It's intended to get you to be covered, but doesn't provide for everyone in the state. The state is a master of manipulating the truth, she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.

I won't lie. I did not understand a word of this.

OK...basically, it's not universal coverage as is believed and the legislators and media tried to make it out to be. Not by a long shot. What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you while at the same time it sets heavy standards for access to people at a lower than normal cost than previously was happening. It's just a requirement that you are covered and allows you to get cheaper coverage, but it doesn't provide it unless you qualify for MassHealth(our Medicaid plan).

It's entirely possible that she didn't make enough money to buy health insurance and made too much to qualify from MassHealth...thus, no coverage. The state withholds her state income taxes until she proves that she has coverage, so if she doesn't have it because either she can't afford it or chooses not to buy it then she doesn't get her money.

Again, it was never intended to cover everyone, just get better access at a lower cost than previously. If she doesn't have it, it's either because she lost it when the bar burned down or she's working under the table or she can't afford it. Either way, Jeph is probably trying to make another political statement there.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 06 Feb 2020, 22:15
Re: Winslow...

at least he's trying to do something that'll have an impact immediately. Even if only one AI is helped directly, it's still sending shockwaves through the system as people try to cover their asses and do something to look like they are doing something- that reaction is the key and what really helps them in the long run!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Drunken Old Man on 06 Feb 2020, 22:49
The answer to the poll...the only POSSIBLE answer...is Boo-Boo.
https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=763
Why not Princess Spookyspell (http://"https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1896")?
She couldn't be reached for comment.

Apparently.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Feb 2020, 23:37
Well, I suggested that Roko go to a lawyer with political ambitions. However, it looks like Jeph has decided to go one step further. To have a seriously important public figure, genius and, let's be brutal here, defence contractor say that the current situation for May is entirely unacceptable to him. That will make the politicians sit up, take notice and, likely, panic. It will be curious to see how all these barriers to May getting help never really existed at all and how much the bureaucrats will insist that they never blocked, refused or were even aware of Roko's request for a review.

That said, yeah, Hanners is right. Between here and there is going to be a serious mess of rage, fear, political ass-covering and scapegoat-finding and it's going to be a difficult thing to live through for all involved and  their friends.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: flondrix on 07 Feb 2020, 02:27
Alternative scenario:

"So they wouldn't let you be a fighter plane, eh?  Well I have a job opening coming up.  This new probe is supposed to dive-bomb the sun, and we can't find any AI crazy enough to pilot it, on account of the reactor hasn't been tested."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: brasca on 07 Feb 2020, 07:38
Well, I suggested that Roko go to a lawyer with political ambitions. However, it looks like Jeph has decided to go one step further. To have a seriously important public figure, genius and, let's be brutal here, defence contractor say that the current situation for May is entirely unacceptable to him. That will make the politicians sit up, take notice and, likely, panic. It will be curious to see how all these barriers to May getting help never really existed at all and how much the bureaucrats will insist that they never blocked, refused or were even aware of Roko's request for a review.

That said, yeah, Hanners is right. Between here and there is going to be a serious mess of rage, fear, political ass-covering and scapegoat-finding and it's going to be a difficult thing to live through for all involved and  their friends.

The problem is it’s still a quick fix from someone who could make it happen. 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 07 Feb 2020, 07:45
Hey Hanners!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 07 Feb 2020, 13:57
Thanks IICIH? and awkwardness.

Romneycare is just Obamacare at the state level.
...
If your employer doesn't provide health insurance as a benefit, the only way to get it is to buy it yourself or to be poor enough to qualify for indigent health care. Buying it yourself is cost-prohibitive and Mass. does not enough to subsidize the purchase.
...
So it's advertised as universal coverage but if you work as a bar back you might get stuck in the middle between being poor enough for state-funded insurance and being rich enough to buy a private plan.

Okay. This much makes sense, thanks.

What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you...

Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?

Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?

Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.

It's just a requirement that you are covered ...

Again, can you be more precise? It doesn't sound to me like health care is exactly required... only that you have to pay a tax penalty of some kind if you are not covered. Is that right? It sounds like Australia's Medicare levy surcharge (https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/medicare-levy/medicare-levy-surcharge/) (except that everyone is covered by Medicare, regardless of whether you have private health insurance or of how much you earn).

So to go back to the original post:

... she might not be eligible for free care(MassHealth) due to her making too much and she might not be able to afford to buy it. So she actually might not have ANY health insurance and what she might get from the state in taxes is a fraction of what she'd have to shell out for health insurance costs.

Okay, I get this now (except for the "what she might get from the state in taxes" bit - the state pays her taxes? do you mean... no, I have no idea what you mean).

Point of order from a resident: it's only a requirement that you HAVE it, not that you GET it.

DEEPLY CONFUSING but maybe I should just give up on this sentence.

I probably understand enough for the purposes of the conversation anyway, so thanks.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Feb 2020, 01:38
You're required to have it even if you're left no way to get it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2020, 02:20
You're required to have it even if you're left no way to get it.

You keep using that word...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 08 Feb 2020, 10:22
Well, I suggested that Roko go to a lawyer with political ambitions. However, it looks like Jeph has decided to go one step further. To have a seriously important public figure, genius and, let's be brutal here, defence contractor say that the current situation for May is entirely unacceptable to him. That will make the politicians sit up, take notice and, likely, panic. It will be curious to see how all these barriers to May getting help never really existed at all and how much the bureaucrats will insist that they never blocked, refused or were even aware of Roko's request for a review.

That said, yeah, Hanners is right. Between here and there is going to be a serious mess of rage, fear, political ass-covering and scapegoat-finding and it's going to be a difficult thing to live through for all involved and  their friends.

The problem is it’s still a quick fix from someone who could make it happen.
Not to mention that nearly noone wins when politicians panic.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 08 Feb 2020, 10:29
You're required to have it even if you're left no way to get it.

You keep using that word...
Not having it incurs a fine.

Weird fact: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act was ultimately only deemed Constitutional by the Supreme Court by way of the PPAC falling under Congress's power to create new taxes.

If that isn't telling of our country's bureaucratic shenanigans, I don't know what is.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Penquin47 on 08 Feb 2020, 12:57
Quote
Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?

Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?

Income tax is taken out of your paycheck every time you get paid.  At the end of the year, you're given a statement of how much tax you paid, which you then take to a tax return service to figure out how much you should have paid.  If you didn't pay enough, then you have to pay the balance at that point; if you paid too much, you tell the government and they send you a check (or in modern times deposit it into your bank account).

However, if you can't show that you have health insurance, you don't get the tax return if you overpaid throughout the year.  They just keep the excess as a penalty for not having health insurance.'

This is why despite being single and childless I tell my employers I have two dependents so they withhold less in taxes.  I've had my taxes within a hundred dollars either way for the last ten years (one time I managed to hit it perfectly and had a tax return of $0!) thanks to how shit is structured.  Suits me fine - the government is not getting an interest-free loan from me and I don't have the "omg I'm gonna get a huge tax return!" that leads to it being spent three times before I even get it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2020, 16:02
So, if you owe the government money at the end of the tax year, then there are no consequences whatsoever? That is odd. But okay.

I think I understand it about as well as I want to now.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: jwhouk on 08 Feb 2020, 18:10
So, if you owe the government money at the end of the tax year, then there are no consequences whatsoever? That is odd. But okay.

I think I understand it about as well as I want to now.

Ohhhhh there are consequences. Your tax bill suddenly goes up. Ask me how I know. Go on, ask me.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2020, 18:45
Okay, I'll bite. How do you know?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: jwhouk on 08 Feb 2020, 20:50
$1,100.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Penquin47 on 08 Feb 2020, 22:08
As long as you've paid 90% of your tax bill*, they call it good in that there are no consequences other than having to write them a check instead of getting a refund.  If you paid less than that, though, there's a penalty based on how much you owe.

(Or if you owe less than $1000, or there were some kind of extenuating circumstances such as a natural disaster that affected your income, or a few other ways to get around it.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Tova on 09 Feb 2020, 02:31
Okay. I still find it weird that your penalty is based on how much of your income was withheld by your employer for tax, something you have little control over. Or am I misunderstanding that as well?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: jwhouk on 09 Feb 2020, 07:54
You do have control of how much your employer withholds from your check. It's called a W-4 form (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw4.pdf). You can claim a certain number of exemptions, which your employer uses to determine how much tax should be taken out of your check weekly. You can also ask for your employer to take an additional amount out of each check (weekly, biweekly, monthly) in case you think your withholding won't be enough for the year based on your tax situation. (Looks up at previous post, sighs)

Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: DSL on 09 Feb 2020, 13:19
... And if you're self-employed and file quarterly estimated taxes ... you want to be a particularly good estimator. I choose to err on the side of overpaying. It means the government gets the free use of my money for part of the year, but it beats paying a penalty.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Wingy on 10 Feb 2020, 04:33
What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you...

Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?

Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?

Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.

It means, if you don't have a documented health plan, and you paid in too much income tax to the state, then your refund of overpaid tax, all or in part, can be kept by the state.  Ostensibly to help pay off the cost of whatever care you used during the year but did not pay for in the form of private insurance and thus took from the state.  The Federal level ACA (Obamacare) was similarly modeled and this was called the "individual mandate" and worked similarly: if you didn't have proof of coverage, it made the most sense to avoid overpaying taxes (because you wouldn't get a refund). 

Past tense is used above because the Republicans in the federal Congress passed a bill and it was signed into law effectively eliminating the federal individual mandate.*  Now there is a court case pending, last I knew, attempting to remove the last bits of the ACA from the law by noticing that the funding method (the individual mandate) is not severable from the rest of the ACA bits, and since the mandate has been severed (made void), therefore the rest of the law is similarly null and void.  I believe this case is still pending in federal appeals court.

* Certain more libertarian elements (me included) viewed this with rejoicing because it removed what amounts to a tax imposed by executive order.  That's a dangerous precedent to set and accept for any length of time; it's Congresses job to levy taxes, not the executive branch by fiat.  However, we imagined that this event would also force Congress back to doing their job and finding the funds to pay for the rest of the ACA.  This has not turned out to be the case and as a result, many of the state-driven implementation pieces of the ACA are now seriously jeopardized due to lack of funding, with the end result of people dying for lack of proper health care.  The Republican party branded candidates are going to have a lot to answer for come November 6, 2020...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 10 Feb 2020, 14:50
Funny thing: IIRC over here in Austria, if you manage to tell them you'd get a tax return of less than 800 to 1000 euro, they don't even contest it, since somebody looking at it costs more than that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Case on 14 Feb 2020, 10:55
What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you...

Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?

Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?

Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.

It means, if you don't have a documented health plan, and you paid in too much income tax to the state, then your refund of overpaid tax, all or in part, can be kept by the state.  Ostensibly to help pay off the cost of whatever care you used during the year but did not pay for in the form of private insurance and thus took from the state.  The Federal level ACA (Obamacare) was similarly modeled and this was called the "individual mandate" and worked similarly: if you didn't have proof of coverage, it made the most sense to avoid overpaying taxes (because you wouldn't get a refund). 

Okay, I think that now I understand better why Americans are not so enamoured with the ACA - it's pretty hard to see how this system isn't overly complicated & opaque, doesn't spuriously involve the state, and how it acts in a way that is fair (both fairness wrt to burden-sharing and the specifics of penalizing undesired behaviour).

I'd caution against conflating the term 'individual mandate' with this weird tax-deduction penalty whaggamathingy - Not merely to accommodate my OCD, but also because it's easy to imagine that when people debate healthcare systems and compare the ACA to other designs that feature a legal requirement to have insurance (like the Austrian, Belgian and German ones), they will be tempted to assume that the latter also feature this weird income tax-return penalty thingy. That is not the case (not entirely certain about the Austrian & Belgian systems, but it would surprise me if they did).

(click to show/hide)


Anyhow - thanks to everybody who helped educating the furriners.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 15 Feb 2020, 05:26
What it does is require you to show proof of coverage to get your state income tax returned to you...

Okay... not totally clear. "your income tax returned to you? I can only assume you don't get your entire income tax returned to if you have coverage. Can you be more precise?

Does it mean that a portion of your tax is some kind of a health care levy which is returnable only if you can show proof of health care coverage?

Buying it is legally required, to make sure there are enough healthy people paying in to meet the costs of the people with pre-existing conditions.

It means, if you don't have a documented health plan, and you paid in too much income tax to the state, then your refund of overpaid tax, all or in part, can be kept by the state.  Ostensibly to help pay off the cost of whatever care you used during the year but did not pay for in the form of private insurance and thus took from the state.  The Federal level ACA (Obamacare) was similarly modeled and this was called the "individual mandate" and worked similarly: if you didn't have proof of coverage, it made the most sense to avoid overpaying taxes (because you wouldn't get a refund). 

Okay, I think that now I understand better why Americans are not so enamoured with the ACA - it's pretty hard to see how this system isn't overly complicated & opaque, doesn't spuriously involve the state, and how it acts in a way that is fair (both fairness wrt to burden-sharing and the specifics of penalizing undesired behaviour).

I'd caution against conflating the term 'individual mandate' with this weird tax-deduction penalty whaggamathingy - Not merely to accommodate my OCD, but also because it's easy to imagine that when people debate healthcare systems and compare the ACA to other designs that feature a legal requirement to have insurance (like the Austrian, Belgian and German ones), they will be tempted to assume that the latter also feature this weird income tax-return penalty thingy. That is not the case (not entirely certain about the Austrian & Belgian systems, but it would surprise me if they did).

(click to show/hide)


Anyhow - thanks to everybody who helped educating the furriners.
Removing the profit motive from healthcare in our country would do WONDERS for it.

[For those who have vision impairment of some variety, that's WONDERS in rainbow colos starting with red on the left. Since indigo isn't available in the color selction, teal was  substituted and blue got shifted over one.]
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 16 Feb 2020, 07:26
Removing the profit motive from healthcare in our country would do WONDERS for it.

[For those who have vision impairment of some variety, that's WONDERS in rainbow colos starting with red on the left. Since indigo isn't available in the color selction, teal was  substituted and blue got shifted over one.]

That, and doing something about student loans.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4190-4194 (3rd - 7th February 2020)
Post by: TorporChambre on 18 Mar 2020, 23:02
That’s Cerenkov radiation. The rest of the comic since then is [woven with] the hallucinations of Marten [et alia], dying from the radiation exposure.
eGads! And that's when he met the Beast of Bourbon! And only after that would the advanced cybrids emerge. Only after would they visit Station. The rule of parsimony would have us disbelieve the great Ellicott-Chatham intellect, eccentricity, and wealth.
My Rollenspiel demands revision.