(07-20-2017 12:59 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is that you're only talking about a sliver of the pie.
People whose employers provide them a subsidized group health plan aren't paying 40% increases.
People on medicaid/medicare aren't paying 40% increases.
People who get subsidies for the exchanges aren't paying 40% increases.
Those with employer paid insurance are seeing large increases and lower coverage every year. More and more employers are dropping coverage all together. If you think the vast majority of middle America is not getting the short end of the stick you are wrong. The money to pay for all those low income subisidized rates is coming as a DIRECT wealth transfer from the middle class. I know my insurance is double what I paid just 3 years ago and pays for virtually nothing under $5,0000. It's worthless to anyone without a major surgery or a chronic desease. It's essentially the same catastrophic policy we used to buy for virtually nothing. In fact, the many of the old catastrophic policies had some minimal flat fee in network doctor visits and free well care. These new policies never seen to pay a dime when I use it. Obamacare has been an unmitigated disaster for most of the middle class---the same people it was supposed to help the most. Its a low income welfare program sold as a middle class benefit----biggest scam since social security.
(07-20-2017 12:59 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is that you're only talking about a sliver of the pie.
People whose employers provide them a subsidized group health plan aren't paying 40% increases.
People on medicaid/medicare aren't paying 40% increases.
People who get subsidies for the exchanges aren't paying 40% increases.
You're close to admitting the problem, you're just sugar coating it by calling it a "sliver" of the pie.
In exact terms, it is TAXPAYERS who are paying these huge increases. It is the TAXPAYERS who have seen their access to affordable healthcare removed. And when you have angry taxpayers, all the freeloaders in the world aint going to keep the taxpayers down. It will get very, very ugly. It always does. Which is why DC is playing with a bomb that has no fuse left.
(07-20-2017 09:36 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]They should, agreed. And Dems should focus on trying to beat Repubs.
Can't recall if it was you who suggested this, but someone on here at one time suggested that the whole primary system perhaps needs to just be scrapped, and party leaders should simply decide amongst themselves who will be the party's candidate.
I'd be for that, just fine, since I'm not a member of any party. Perhaps that would also result in more independent candidates.
Oh look, a communist.
That's the way they do it in Russia, China, Cuba and some other unsavory countries. Oh, they do that in Mexico too, but Mexico is pretty close to a socialist country already.
This is no way to conduct a presidential race. The people should be the ones doing the choosing. As it is with the way the electoral thingy is conducted already a elector can renege on the people's choice and do his own choosing.
(07-20-2017 01:38 PM)olliebaba Wrote: [ -> ] (07-20-2017 09:36 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]They should, agreed. And Dems should focus on trying to beat Repubs.
Can't recall if it was you who suggested this, but someone on here at one time suggested that the whole primary system perhaps needs to just be scrapped, and party leaders should simply decide amongst themselves who will be the party's candidate.
I'd be for that, just fine, since I'm not a member of any party. Perhaps that would also result in more independent candidates.
Oh look, a communist.
That's the way they do it in Russia, China, Cuba and some other unsavory countries. Oh, they do that in Mexico too, but Mexico is pretty close to a socialist country already.
This is no way to conduct a presidential race. The people should be the ones doing the choosing. As it is with the way the electoral thingy is conducted already a elector can renege on the people's choice and do his own choosing.
But yet she'll be the first one to b*tch about gerrymandering.
(07-20-2017 10:48 AM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ] (07-20-2017 10:45 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ] (07-20-2017 10:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]The plan will collapse on its own. Let it.
And then Republicans will be labeled as "sitting there, doing nothing to help those suffering and dying".
because of Obama.....
She's right you know. It won't matter to the Liberalturds whose fault it is they'll only see it as the failed Republicans. Repeal the darn thing and come up with something, anything as there won't be anyone on the Left and some on the Right that will be satisfied anyway. The Reps won't be able to satisfy EVERYONE.
At least they wouldn't renege on the promised Repeal.
(07-20-2017 09:15 AM)LeFlâneur Wrote: [ -> ] (07-20-2017 09:05 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]You have to run someone against them, who is better and more well liked by the locals than that person. You can't just pluck someone off a list and fly them into the state from across the country ... that's too easy to sniff out. It has to be someone from Nevada, from Alaska (especially there), from W Virginia ... and if these people, who are that good already, are already there ... then why weren't they elected last time?
Good point. That strategy didn't work for Hillary in New York. Oh wait it did. And it did for Bobby Kennedy in NY. Maybe Democrats like carpetbaggers.
Although not so much in GA recently.
(07-20-2017 10:57 AM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]Are you calling into question the validity of the presidential election??
Are you really so dense as to think that's what he said? Wait, don't answer, it's obvious.
(07-20-2017 01:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]Those with employer paid insurance are seeing large increases and lower coverage every year.
ACA has nothing to do with employer subsidized group plans.
(07-20-2017 01:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]More and more employers are dropping coverage all together.
That's a decision for the company and its employees. ACA has nothing to do with that.
(07-20-2017 01:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ]If you think the vast majority of middle America is not getting the short end of the stick you are wrong.
You haven't supplied evidence that is the case, so I'm not going to take your word for it.
(07-20-2017 01:08 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]TAXPAYERS who are paying these huge increases.
Some taxpayers. More taxpayers/voters are positively affected.
Majority rules
Nope. The candidate with the most votes win. You are wrong
(07-21-2017 12:11 PM)MplsBison Wrote: [ -> ]Nope. The candidate with the most votes win. You are wrong
Didn't or haven't you said that Killary won the popular vote? And yet, she's not the president. Thank God.
As you know, POTUS is elected by EC votes.
bwahahahaha, libturds trying to tell us how the president is elected just months after November 2016 happened. Thats rich.