Politics, Politics, Politics
- Thread starter falcondfw69
- Start date
and you think these people are working to help the country
a few of the fuckings we are about to receive......
Trump wants to start charging stores to accept food stamp...
Donald Trump wants to charge retailers a fee for accepting food stamps as payment from the poor.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/video/trump-wants-start-charging-stores-185200247.html
that will open the door for the demise of food stamps for a lot of people in need!
If Obamacare fails, it’ll be bad news for Trump
The Affordable Care Act is in trouble. Long-time critics of the law are gloating. That’s a mistake.
Insurance companies are increasingly deciding that participating in the ACA is too much trouble, and pulling out. The latest notable move came when Anthem said it would stop offering ACA policies in Ohio next year. If no other insurer steps in, that could leave several hundred thousand Ohioans with no ACA plans to choose from.
This trend is intensifying, causing concern that the ACA, also known as Obamacare, is falling into a “death spiral” from which it can’t recover. In 2015, an average of 6 insurers per state offered policies under Obamacare. That has fallen to 4.3 and is likely to fall further in 2018. There was only 1 state with 1 insurer in 2015. Now there are 5. Fewer issuers generally equate with higher prices, and next year could be the first time significant portions of the country have no ACA coverage available.
Obamacare is such a white-hot political issue that perspective is crucial. In some states–New York, Wisconsin, California–the program seems to be working fine. And for all the attention Obamacare gets, it only covers about 6% of the population. Most working-age Americans get coverage through employer-sponsored plans unaffected by the ACA, and Medicare covers most seniors. People who lose coverage under the ACA can still purchase insurance in the private market, though they can’t get the subsidies Obamacare provides and might find coverage unaffordable.
Obamacare has slashed the uninsured portion of the population, however, one reason its demise would be explosively controversial. And President Trump is now America’s Obamacare basher-in-chief, repeatedly calling the law a disaster and predicting its failure.
*********Trump’s hand in weakening of Obamacare**********
To some extent, Trump is contributing to that failure. Anthem, for instance, said uncertainty relating to government policy was one of the factors leading to its withdrawal from Ohio. The biggest concern for insurers right now is the status of subsidies the government pays to insurers to reimburse them for cutting costs for lower-income subscribers. Trump can ******* those subsidies outright if he wants to, and has suggested he might. Since the fate of those subsidies directly affects insurer profitability, it’s no wonder some firms don’t want to wait and see what Trump decides.
Some ACA critics—virtually all of them Republican—seem to delight at the prospect of Obamacare crumbling one county at a time, perhaps obviating the need to pass legislation that would formally repeal it. But this seems remarkably short-sighted. Trump’s attacks on the ACA, and the real prospect of repeal under Republican-controlled government, have pushed public approval of the law to the highest levels ever. Americans disapprove of Republican plans to roll back the ACA and particularly dislike proposed cuts to Medicaid. So Republicans are now threatening programs Americans more or less like.
As the 2018 midterm elections draw near, it seems likely that Obamacare will be in worse shape than it is now—either repealed or neglected, with coverage declining and the uninsured rate going up. How in the world will this benefit incumbent Republicans? Scare stories about people who might get harmed by the GOP healthcare plan are already going viral, with Trump increasingly catching blame
for sabotaging Obamacare. As more people lose coverage, tales of cancer patients denied coverage and working people enduring medical bankruptcy are sure to multiply all across the media spectrum.
The demise of Obamacare would also expose a myth the law’s critics have cleverly exploited: That the ACA is somehow responsible for the soaring medical costs everybody feels. Healthcare costs have been rising far faster than ordinary inflation since the 1980s, with the gap widening during the last 15 years or so. This has almost no connection with Obamacare, which wasn’t passed until 2010, didn’t go into effect until 2014, and didn’t really change anything for most people with insurance. But Obamacare critics have conflated rising costs with the advent of the law, and the US health system is so opaque and complex that it sounds reasonable to a lot of ordinary people.
Republicans seem to think voters will blame Barack Obama (or maybe Hillary Clinton) in 2018 if the ACA is crumbling, more Americans are losing coverage and everybody’s costs are going up, as usual. As feckless as Democrats have been in the era of Trump, this seems implausible. Republicans used Obamacare as a bogeyman when Democrats were in power, but now that they’re in power, they control Obamacare. The bogeyman is gone.
It’s also possible, down the road, that continued do-nothingness on the real healthcare problem—rising costs for everybody—could lead to surprising consequences. California, for instance, has begun to explore a single-payer healthcare system, with the state government footing the bill. Sure, it’s wacky California, but many serious people recognize that the United States is the only advanced economy without such a system, which provides massive scale and the real ability to control costs. Famed capitalist Warren Buffett favors the idea, and even the CEO of insurance firm Aetna has said it’s worth debating. If Obamacare fails, the case for a single-payer system will get stronger, not weaker.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/obamacare-fails-itll-bad-news-trump-172107734.html
House GOP on track to undoing post-2008 financial rules
House Poised to Pass Bill Taking Aim at Dodd-Frank Regulations
The bill is expected to pass the House with only Republican support. It faces long odds of becoming law, however, because it would require the support of …
http://www.whio.com/news/national-g...-2008-financial-rules/QUfNZZ9lv0vDoKULvMTo4O/
Trump ignites political fight over U.S. banking law reforms
That will involve a lot more than issuing an order, said former Democratic congressman Barney Frank, co-author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law that raised ... forget what happened today,” she said in a statement. Trump's
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-wealth-fiduciary-idUSKBN15I199
The Finance 202: Why Trump's populist agenda is in retreat
Inside the administration, Trump’s Wall Street heavies are running the show ... It has the potential to pass on significant costs to the consumer. It has the potential …
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...56443e9b69b2fb981dc51/?utm_term=.b3d82e11fcdb
America’s CEOs fall out of love with Trump
And the White House is now engaged in a very public fight with itself over how and when to raise the debt limit, a terrifying prospect for Wall Street ... pushing …
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/03/donald-trump-ceos-corporate-relationship-239080
and that is not even covering Trumps wanting to raise the debt ceiling.....what happened to these fiscal conservative republicans and all the ******* they gave Obama about it?
a few of the fuckings we are about to receive......
Trump wants to start charging stores to accept food stamp...
Donald Trump wants to charge retailers a fee for accepting food stamps as payment from the poor.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/video/trump-wants-start-charging-stores-185200247.html
that will open the door for the demise of food stamps for a lot of people in need!
If Obamacare fails, it’ll be bad news for Trump
The Affordable Care Act is in trouble. Long-time critics of the law are gloating. That’s a mistake.
Insurance companies are increasingly deciding that participating in the ACA is too much trouble, and pulling out. The latest notable move came when Anthem said it would stop offering ACA policies in Ohio next year. If no other insurer steps in, that could leave several hundred thousand Ohioans with no ACA plans to choose from.
This trend is intensifying, causing concern that the ACA, also known as Obamacare, is falling into a “death spiral” from which it can’t recover. In 2015, an average of 6 insurers per state offered policies under Obamacare. That has fallen to 4.3 and is likely to fall further in 2018. There was only 1 state with 1 insurer in 2015. Now there are 5. Fewer issuers generally equate with higher prices, and next year could be the first time significant portions of the country have no ACA coverage available.
Obamacare is such a white-hot political issue that perspective is crucial. In some states–New York, Wisconsin, California–the program seems to be working fine. And for all the attention Obamacare gets, it only covers about 6% of the population. Most working-age Americans get coverage through employer-sponsored plans unaffected by the ACA, and Medicare covers most seniors. People who lose coverage under the ACA can still purchase insurance in the private market, though they can’t get the subsidies Obamacare provides and might find coverage unaffordable.
Obamacare has slashed the uninsured portion of the population, however, one reason its demise would be explosively controversial. And President Trump is now America’s Obamacare basher-in-chief, repeatedly calling the law a disaster and predicting its failure.
*********Trump’s hand in weakening of Obamacare**********
To some extent, Trump is contributing to that failure. Anthem, for instance, said uncertainty relating to government policy was one of the factors leading to its withdrawal from Ohio. The biggest concern for insurers right now is the status of subsidies the government pays to insurers to reimburse them for cutting costs for lower-income subscribers. Trump can ******* those subsidies outright if he wants to, and has suggested he might. Since the fate of those subsidies directly affects insurer profitability, it’s no wonder some firms don’t want to wait and see what Trump decides.
Some ACA critics—virtually all of them Republican—seem to delight at the prospect of Obamacare crumbling one county at a time, perhaps obviating the need to pass legislation that would formally repeal it. But this seems remarkably short-sighted. Trump’s attacks on the ACA, and the real prospect of repeal under Republican-controlled government, have pushed public approval of the law to the highest levels ever. Americans disapprove of Republican plans to roll back the ACA and particularly dislike proposed cuts to Medicaid. So Republicans are now threatening programs Americans more or less like.
As the 2018 midterm elections draw near, it seems likely that Obamacare will be in worse shape than it is now—either repealed or neglected, with coverage declining and the uninsured rate going up. How in the world will this benefit incumbent Republicans? Scare stories about people who might get harmed by the GOP healthcare plan are already going viral, with Trump increasingly catching blame
for sabotaging Obamacare. As more people lose coverage, tales of cancer patients denied coverage and working people enduring medical bankruptcy are sure to multiply all across the media spectrum.
The demise of Obamacare would also expose a myth the law’s critics have cleverly exploited: That the ACA is somehow responsible for the soaring medical costs everybody feels. Healthcare costs have been rising far faster than ordinary inflation since the 1980s, with the gap widening during the last 15 years or so. This has almost no connection with Obamacare, which wasn’t passed until 2010, didn’t go into effect until 2014, and didn’t really change anything for most people with insurance. But Obamacare critics have conflated rising costs with the advent of the law, and the US health system is so opaque and complex that it sounds reasonable to a lot of ordinary people.
Republicans seem to think voters will blame Barack Obama (or maybe Hillary Clinton) in 2018 if the ACA is crumbling, more Americans are losing coverage and everybody’s costs are going up, as usual. As feckless as Democrats have been in the era of Trump, this seems implausible. Republicans used Obamacare as a bogeyman when Democrats were in power, but now that they’re in power, they control Obamacare. The bogeyman is gone.
It’s also possible, down the road, that continued do-nothingness on the real healthcare problem—rising costs for everybody—could lead to surprising consequences. California, for instance, has begun to explore a single-payer healthcare system, with the state government footing the bill. Sure, it’s wacky California, but many serious people recognize that the United States is the only advanced economy without such a system, which provides massive scale and the real ability to control costs. Famed capitalist Warren Buffett favors the idea, and even the CEO of insurance firm Aetna has said it’s worth debating. If Obamacare fails, the case for a single-payer system will get stronger, not weaker.
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/obamacare-fails-itll-bad-news-trump-172107734.html
House GOP on track to undoing post-2008 financial rules
House Poised to Pass Bill Taking Aim at Dodd-Frank Regulations
The bill is expected to pass the House with only Republican support. It faces long odds of becoming law, however, because it would require the support of …
http://www.whio.com/news/national-g...-2008-financial-rules/QUfNZZ9lv0vDoKULvMTo4O/
Trump ignites political fight over U.S. banking law reforms
That will involve a lot more than issuing an order, said former Democratic congressman Barney Frank, co-author of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform law that raised ... forget what happened today,” she said in a statement. Trump's
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-wealth-fiduciary-idUSKBN15I199
The Finance 202: Why Trump's populist agenda is in retreat
Inside the administration, Trump’s Wall Street heavies are running the show ... It has the potential to pass on significant costs to the consumer. It has the potential …
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...56443e9b69b2fb981dc51/?utm_term=.b3d82e11fcdb
America’s CEOs fall out of love with Trump
And the White House is now engaged in a very public fight with itself over how and when to raise the debt limit, a terrifying prospect for Wall Street ... pushing …
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/03/donald-trump-ceos-corporate-relationship-239080
and that is not even covering Trumps wanting to raise the debt ceiling.....what happened to these fiscal conservative republicans and all the ******* they gave Obama about it?
....If the AHCA is the replacement Republicans think will provide lower premiums & better benefits for the tax payers, I have a feeling the ass kicking Dems took in 2010 is going to be miniscule compared to the ass kicking ReThugs will get in 2018 midterms. Thing that is so funny, now, is Pres. Chump brags about the carriers in the states pulling out ... hell, all the Republican run states refused to set up the State Exchanges, and wanted to ******* the subsidies for the Nat'l ACA health plan to help ******* the ACA. Do they really think, IF they implement their health plan, resulting in so many initially losing their newly acquired health plan (14 million or so), that voters won't figure out what's gone on?
....As I said from the beginning of this thread, Republicans have NO interest in providing ANY health plan to the voters; its all about subsidizing their "trickle down" tax cuts by getting rid or privatizing of ALL entitlements in order to keep their wealthy constituents & corporations happ;y;. Why Pres Chump's voters still stand behind him "bobbleheading" his words of reassurance that the plan he will offer will be less expensive with better benefits is totally baffling.
....I'm honestly starting to think that Pres Chump maybe IS in collusion with Russians to TANK our economy.
....As I said from the beginning of this thread, Republicans have NO interest in providing ANY health plan to the voters; its all about subsidizing their "trickle down" tax cuts by getting rid or privatizing of ALL entitlements in order to keep their wealthy constituents & corporations happ;y;. Why Pres Chump's voters still stand behind him "bobbleheading" his words of reassurance that the plan he will offer will be less expensive with better benefits is totally baffling.
....I'm honestly starting to think that Pres Chump maybe IS in collusion with Russians to TANK our economy.
Last edited:
I really don't think that is a irrational statement at all!
he sure is doing all he can to make it happen it would seem
especially turning things back over to wall street..... tax cuts.... etc
Health care will never be affordable under any bill that requires by law to purchase. Competition is what lowers prices. With a law in place that requires you to purchase, (guaranteed money to the insurance companies) they can charge what ever they want. Neither Obama or Trump will address this issue. NOTHING written in either bill will control cost.
Mac, you like to talk smoke and mirrors - here is a big one.
People aren't going to "loose" healthcare either, because the law requires you to have it. Therefor if you don't qualify for the exchange, you will most likely qualify for medicaid. But to understand that you need to be able to understand the reason more people have healthcare now in the first place, is NOT because it is affordable (because it's not), but because they are required by LAW to have it. If that law was removed today, and millions dropped their health care tomorrow, the left would claim millions "lost" their health care, when in fact they choose to drop it. The government paying for Medicaid and/or subsidizing health care is no different than what we had before when non-insured would get a "heart ship" discount.
Meanwhile ******* companies continue to play their little game, Neither the left or the right want to touch THAT either, but at least Trump has brought it up a few times.
Oh and lets not forget that neither the Republicans or the Democrats have anything in the bill that prevents doctors from "double dipping" i.e., charge you and the insurance.
We don't' need a health care bill that forces people to buy crappy health care - we need real healthcare reform.
Mac, you like to talk smoke and mirrors - here is a big one.
People aren't going to "loose" healthcare either, because the law requires you to have it. Therefor if you don't qualify for the exchange, you will most likely qualify for medicaid. But to understand that you need to be able to understand the reason more people have healthcare now in the first place, is NOT because it is affordable (because it's not), but because they are required by LAW to have it. If that law was removed today, and millions dropped their health care tomorrow, the left would claim millions "lost" their health care, when in fact they choose to drop it. The government paying for Medicaid and/or subsidizing health care is no different than what we had before when non-insured would get a "heart ship" discount.
Meanwhile ******* companies continue to play their little game, Neither the left or the right want to touch THAT either, but at least Trump has brought it up a few times.
Oh and lets not forget that neither the Republicans or the Democrats have anything in the bill that prevents doctors from "double dipping" i.e., charge you and the insurance.
We don't' need a health care bill that forces people to buy crappy health care - we need real healthcare reform.
that may be PARTIALLY true...... there are a lot that have that are glad to have it.... whatever the cost... if they can afford it!
what really put more people on was Medicaid.... and with all the cuts there.... that is what will cause people to drop it
sure there are some ****** on....... but not near the amount that are on thanks to Medicaid.... cutting taxes for employers is what will ******* the Medicaid
funny.... just on the phone about that very issue!
yes but no one wanting to work on it..... and it all boils down to both sides really fighting about the taxes it will take to make it work is the basic reason.... there are some changes they can make that cost nothing....but as long as the issue of money is there the other doesn't come up
the right keeps pushing the issue it is dead and doesn't work.... they COULD fix it if they wanted to
Not true though they did not speak of ancient politics back on Earth in the 21st century instead it focused on intergalactic politics pertaining to the other alien races in the series. There were Ferengis that were featured on a few episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Voyager and more prominently on Star Trek: Deep Space 9. Star Trek was a metaphor on modern life that inspired inventions from Captain Kirk's communicator to our much improved modern day cellphone, or the eye tracking display from Deep Space 9's similarity to Apple's eyephone.
( http://www.newrisingmedia.com/all/2...-latest-to-file-wearable-computer-patent.html )
The Ferengi's greatest attributes was that they were very capitalistic, pro business and they hated taxes. If they were a scenario where they had to adopt a position politically in our era, I would think they would be Republicans for that very reason alone.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi )
since I am not into sci-fi...... I will just take you guys word for it
There was the Federation but there were others that were not part of it like the Cardassians (DS9), the Founders (DS9), the Klingons (Next Generation, Original Series, Voyager, DS9, Enterprise) off and on with the Khitomer Accords where the Klingons were at peace with the Federation ( http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Khitomer_Accords ), and others.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardassian )
( http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/Founders )
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klingon )
Last edited:
Nice to see you back Mac. Was that picture of Obama you shared with the KKK now or would it be in the past if he time traveled back in time and met with the Democrats before they magically changed their ideology? If you doubt me feel free to look back at the KKK as "Klan literature spoke highly of politicians such as Woodrow Wilson, William Jennings Bryan, and Grover Cleveland.[36]" and see what their views of the KKK as they were members.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Wesley_Evans )
P.S. Don't forget FDR as he wouldn't acknowledge Jesse Owens during his victory in Hitler's Olympics, but even Hitler thought that FDR was making America into a more racist place.
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Owens ),
( https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistori..._true_that_hitler_was_friendly_towards_jesse/ ),
( http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/571 ),
(
(
( https://www.quora.com/Was-Franklin-Roosevelt-racist )
Last edited:
Interesting what Trump's lawyer said. It would appear that "Trump never told Comey, 'I need loyalty, I expect loyalty,' in form or substance, as Comey claimed."
( http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/trumps-lawyer-speak-comey-hearing/ )
naturally I would expect you to believe a liar in chief.... over someone who has made a career of honesty and serving the public..... that's the way the "trumpies" are
It was Trump's lawyer that stated that. Why would a lawyer lie on national television? Without some form of evidence?
check the news...... he even got dates and facts wrong!
besides when representing a liar..... you HAVE to tell more lies than he does!
and don't tell me you think lawyers are honest?.... surely you jest!
see post 9484
The Comey Hearing
After former FBI Director James Comey testified about his private conversations with President Donald Trump regarding the agency’s Russia investigation, the president’s lawyer gave a brief statement that contained inaccurate and disputed claims:
Marc Kasowitz, the president’s personal attorney, said Trump “never in form or substance directed or suggested” that Comey stop investigating former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Comey testified that Trump asked him at a Feb. 14 meeting if “you can see your way clear … to letting Flynn go.” Comey said he took those words “as a direction” to drop the case.
Kasowitz accused Comey of being disingenuous about his motive for sharing a memo with the New York Times. Comey said he arranged to give the story to the paper after Trump tweeted about having “tapes” of their conversations. Kasowitz claimed the Times quoted from Comey’s “memos” before Trump’s tweet. In fact, the story about the Feb. 14 memo — the one Comey said he shared — appeared four days after the tweet.
Trump’s lawyer also wrongly claimed that Comey “admitted that he leaked to friends of his purported memos.” Comey admitted to giving one memo to one friend.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheck/the-comey-hearing/ar-BBCkfxC?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=ientp
After former FBI Director James Comey testified about his private conversations with President Donald Trump regarding the agency’s Russia investigation, the president’s lawyer gave a brief statement that contained inaccurate and disputed claims:
Marc Kasowitz, the president’s personal attorney, said Trump “never in form or substance directed or suggested” that Comey stop investigating former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Comey testified that Trump asked him at a Feb. 14 meeting if “you can see your way clear … to letting Flynn go.” Comey said he took those words “as a direction” to drop the case.
Kasowitz accused Comey of being disingenuous about his motive for sharing a memo with the New York Times. Comey said he arranged to give the story to the paper after Trump tweeted about having “tapes” of their conversations. Kasowitz claimed the Times quoted from Comey’s “memos” before Trump’s tweet. In fact, the story about the Feb. 14 memo — the one Comey said he shared — appeared four days after the tweet.
Trump’s lawyer also wrongly claimed that Comey “admitted that he leaked to friends of his purported memos.” Comey admitted to giving one memo to one friend.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheck/the-comey-hearing/ar-BBCkfxC?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=ientp
As Trump's lawyer he will have the onus to prove what he says should he get a chance to have his evidence cross examined by his opponent in a courtroom should that ever happen. Certainly you'd make him earn every penny of what Trump pays him if you were the other lawyer opposing Trump's lawyer. And would you have the link for your post 9484?
Last edited:
D
Deleted125623
Guest
Similar threads
