20% is probably a conservative estimate; the way that unemployment is calculated is wildly misleading.
Thanks. I served a tour in the Army from 74-77 just after Viet Nam. No combat duty of any kind, but I'm glad I served, and I'd do it again. You? Yeah, I never liked those berets for everyone. I really like those uniforms in those pictures. And I like those traditional covers and reserving the berets as something for the Special Forces.
I noticed your "Medicare for all" signature, so I thought I would show you this study I did on that a while back. http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-healthcare-can-be-accomplished.500686/page-3
No not me but, uncle in Nam and in for life and even after 30 years taught artillery radar as a civilian. Brother in Navy reserves on a destroyer in the Atlantic during Vietnam for a few years. Cousin in Viet Nam, too. I forgot. I had rheumatic fever 11 or 12, and they would not take me. Oh well....I could have shot lots of folks. hahahaha kidding.........or am I? Used to have firearms and had to get rid of them. Needed money badly. Sucked...even reloaded. Oh well...........
But the President said the premium will go down. So there will be no subsidy at tax time if that is the case.
It remains to be seen whether or not allowing insurance companies to do business nationwide will bring a drop in premiums. It might, or it might just slow the increases. But these measures the president has taken will not solve the health care problem. These measures he's taken address the problems of a certain demographic - those people who make too much to receive a subsidy for their insurance, but too little to afford the high cost of insurance. That demographic has been really hit hard by the rising costs lately. But it is by no means a comprehensive plan. The other thing these measures are doing is putting pressure on Congress. Republicans and Democrats need to work together and compromise. Of course, Congress puts politics ahead of the good of the country, so they are not interested in doing that. By ending the subsidies, the president is applying pressure on Congress to do its job. I have suggested that a solution could be the use of a single government mandate combined with the free market health insurance companies. - Medicare for seniors - Medicaid for the unemployed and unemployable - Employer-provided health insurance for all employees and their dependents (this is the mandate). This wouldn't cost the government anything, and everybody would be then be covered by health insurance. Seth
This is why republicans should be barred from legislating. You guys have no idea how anything works. You act like insurance is a commodity and insurers can just charge whatever they want.
so show me that it is a law not being able to change insurance companies Only way you cant is if you agree not to and if you sign that agreement it is your own dam fault
What? THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU RAM THROUGH UNPOPULAR LEGISLATION ON A PARTY-LINE VOTE: Obamacare Was Built With Flaws: Executive orders allowed the past administration to keep the program alive. Do I just hate the poor so much that I can’t stand to see them getting help paying for health care? Well, no. I have no particular objection to the payments as policy. Except for one small thing, which is that they seem to be sort of illegal. Obamacare’s supporters: What role did you play in bringing us to this pass. A few years ago, as we all stood gaping at the disastrously bungled launch of the Obamacare exchanges, we realized that Obamacare was Beyond Rescue. Obamacare would not, and could not, be the program that had been promised or intended. It had already failed to deliver on key promises for coverage, affordability and of course, the infamous promise that “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” It was also dangerously unstable, requiring steady executive intervention just to keep the program from collapsing. These executive interventions, enthusiastically supported by the law’s proponents, were setting a precedent that would eventually be used against it. Worried that health care was too hostage to the vicissitudes of the markets, Democrats had instead made it the prisoner of politics. Essentially they’ve made it so that Republicans can undo two-thirds of this law with a stroke of the presidential pen. Obamacare is now beyond rescue. The administration has destroyed their own law in order to save it. Now we are watching those dominos fall.
Yes, Obamacare has its problems. Republicans have done NOTHING but tr to sabotage it since i5 was passed.
There’s a bright side: By Cutting Off Obamacare’s Insurer Subsidies, Trump Might Help More People Get Health Coverage: The president has finally brought the law into constitutional compliance. Yea Trump!
Only in the bizzaro alternate reality that conservsrives dwell in, can cutting off subsidies to the poor, help the poor.
Nothing is going to work. This nation had the best of care for all its people. The poor included. The number of people who don't pay and the out of control insurance corps and big pharma combined with 50% of poor mostly new immigrants legal and illegal have flooded our health care systems. People suing doctors have lowered the type of care because the standards of teaching hospitals are lowered now. One uni. was actually going into poor n-hoods to recruit anything that moved into the school. Even helped them fill out the applications. People are not aware of what is going on. If you don't beleive this is true google do a good search.
The backdoor Big Insurance Company Bribes are unconstitutional without Congressional authorization and were not appropriated in Obamacare. In a phrase, you guys worked on this for two years had massive majorities to pass it and screwed the pooch. Ooops! The president has finally brought the law into constitutional compliance. We are a nation of laws. A federal court ruled last year that because Congress never appropriated funding, making the payments violated the separation of powers and thus was illegal. Obama, however, kept paying them anyway. So, up until now, has Trump. With this move, Trump brings the administration of Obamacare into constitutional compliance. In the long run, it might actually increase the number of people with health insurance coverage. After it all shakes out, Obamacare would end up covering even more people. Trump might have just made Obamacare more generous. The premium hikes won't directly affect most low-income people because Obamacare's subsidies increase with premiums, insulating those individuals from higher costs. Over time, the increased subsidies would actually make coverage more attractive for those with qualifying incomes. By 2026, the CBO projects, about a million more people will have coverage. Trump's decision to cut off the unconstitutional backdoor bribes to Big Insurance will also result in more people with subsidized coverage over time. Under the Constitution, the power of the purse lies with Congress alone. Either Congress appropriated them, or it didn't, and in either case the executive branch would have a duty to spend, or not spend, accordingly. Congress didn't appropriate the money, and therefore neither Obama nor Trump had the authority to make the payments.
the subsides are getting cut off to the insurance companies not the poor So how does that hurt the poor? Unless you believe in trickle down
It doesn't. NO WONDER DEMOCRATS ARE SO UPSET: Behind Trump’s latest moves: A return to constitutional government. Obama kept the Affordable Care Act looking healthy via an unconstitutional grant of $1 trillion to health-insurance companies. That required congressional approval, and Obama’s decision to bypass Congress was held unconstitutional by a federal court. President Trump’s decision Thursday to halt the bailout makes the litigation moot and represents a return to constitutional government. The same can be said of Trump’s Friday decision to throw the Iran deal back to Congress, by refusing to certify that Iran is in compliance with the deal. Recall that this was a treaty that should never have been adopted without two-thirds approval in the Senate, as required by the Constitution. That didn’t happen — because a compliant Republican Congress passed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, which provided that the president certify to Congress every 90 days that the suspension of sanctions against the regime is “appropriate and proportionate” with respect to its illicit nuclear program. And that’s what Trump didn’t do. He didn’t tear up the treaty, or even decertify anything. Rather, he failed to certify, and simply told the truth. Iran isn’t permitting the nuclear inspections the treaty contemplates, and the Revolutionary Guard, which controls much of the government, is a terrorist organization. The regime is building missiles that threaten us and our allies, and its infractions don’t justify our continued suspension of sanctions. Now it’s Congress that has to act. Or dodge its duty, as it did when it passed INARA in 2015.
Right. Like I said, only in bizzaro conservative alternate reality can cutting of subsidies to the poor, help the poor. It’s almost as dumb as “tax cuts pay for themselves”
but you been telling us for years that raising taxes on corporations and businesses doesn't hurt the poor, so how could this? you cant have it both ways you know
When have I ever told you anything about corporate taxes? If you want to discus the corporate tax rate, start a different thread.
