You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.


Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit

Remember The Poor


{Politics.143.672}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:31:53 EDT (7 lines)

Medicare is for old people.

Medicaid is for poor people and it was expanded to 139% of poverty
level under the ACA where this woman would have qualified.

Instead she fell through the cracks created by Gov. Scott not expanding


{Politics.143.673}: Tonu Aun {tonu} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:33:53 EDT (2 lines)

Yup, Marc. Those damn death panels we keep hearing so much about are
alive and clicking on all cylinders in Florida.


{Politics.143.674}: Keith Rice {justinthyme} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:35:32 EDT (HTML)

Did anyone actually read the article? The difference should be obvious.


{Politics.143.675}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:42:12 EDT (4 lines)

I read the article.  How is it obvious.

She fell through the cracks because Scott is one of the 19 Republican
governor who refused to expand Medicaid.


{Politics.143.676}: Keith Rice {justinthyme} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:43:08 EDT (HTML)

Why did he do that?


{Politics.143.677}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:50:01 EDT (24 lines)

<Why did he do that? >

Purely political.

And not only did this woman fall through the cracks, but not expanding
Medicaid cost the taxpayers of Florida who are paying for the
expansion on other states with their federal tax dollars., given that
the federal government pays 100% of the Medicaid expansion for the
first three years, then 94 % (approx) after that.

The 20 states choosing not to expand their Medicaid programs under the
Affordable Care Act are forgoing billions of dollars in federal funds,
while residents in their states are contributing to the cost of the
expansions in other states, according to a new Commonwealth Fund

After taking into account federal taxes paid by state residents,
states with the highest net losses include Texas, which will see a net
loss of $9.2 billion in 2022; Florida, which will lose $5 billion;
Georgia, which will lose $2.9 billion, and Virginia, which will lose
$2.8 billion.


{Politics.143.678}: Senator Lampoon {yesdeer} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:52:54 EDT (HTML)

Yeah, and that's why we'd be paying $700 a month for medicare in old age instead of getting the benefits we should have gotten for being forced to pay into these entitlements in the first place.


{Politics.143.679}: Keith Rice {justinthyme} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:19:31 EDT (HTML)

The article offers a different explanation, but your ability to ascribe motives on a purely partisan level implies a defective analytically skill.

The woman could have gotten coverage, just without subsidy. The whole issue is a gimmick cooked up by desperate Democrats.

The complaints Republicans have is that people who have coverage are being screwed by Obamacare.


{Politics.143.680}: Tonu Aun {tonu} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:36:05 EDT (4 lines)

Lets see --- she earned $11K and had three children. Any quesstimate
on what her unsubsidized ACA premium would have cost her? Yup, the law
is fair since no one is allowed to sleep under bridges.... so says
Keith and Governor Scott.


{Politics.143.681}: Tom Austin {taustin} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:37:49 EDT (6 lines)

Why did he do that?

because he doesn't mind if people in his state die needlessly, as long as
he can make a political point.


{Politics.143.682}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 19:12:28 EDT (16 lines)

<Yeah, and that's why we'd be paying $700 a month for medicare in old
age instead of getting the benefits we should have gotten for being
forced to pay into these entitlements in the first place.>

Without Medicare and the ACA, you would be paying a hell of alot more.

States are allowed to age rate and nearly all states have rating bands
that allow then to charge older people (50-64) five times as much as
younger people.  The ACA lowered that to 3:1 (I think it should be

If you privatize Medicare and take away the ACA lower rating 3:1
ratio, the 5:1 (or probably higher) would apply to people over 65.

Republicans dont talk about the age rating bands in their reform
proposals because they dont want them lowered.


{Politics.143.683}: Elizabeth Costello {lizcostello} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 19:17:50 EDT (HTML)

This deserves repeating:

What they do is compare reality to an ideal, then point out how awful that reality is. This is a trained rhetoric, they don't think this way about themselves or their friends, only those they have been taught are their enemies.

They regularly take the most negative interpretation of motives of their opposition without ever making an effort at a holistic view.

But, it makes them feel good about themselves, it's psychologically addicting and they reinforce it in each other. They are driven by feeling good and feeling morally superior ... what immature mind wouldn't embrace such an opportunity?


{Politics.143.684}: Keith Rice {justinthyme} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 20:27:29 EDT (HTML)


There's not a state in this country where a woman making $11K a year with 3 kids doesn't qualify for all the benefits she can cart away.

At that level she's over 50% below Federal Poverty Guidelines, there's no way she wouldn't qualify.


{Politics.143.685}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 22:34:23 EDT (7 lines)

Piketty in Washington: How to Reverse the Increasing Concentration of




{Politics.143.686}: Tonu Aun {tonu} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 22:37:15 EDT (2 lines)

So what was her income if she fell into the donut hole between Florida
Medicaid and when she could get subsidized ACA, Keith?


{Politics.143.687}: Senator Lampoon {yesdeer} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 22:49:18 EDT (HTML)

>Without Medicare and the ACA, you would be paying a hell of alot more.<



{Politics.143.688}: {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 23:13:09 EDT (0 lines)
{erased by marc_dc Thu, 17 Apr 2014 23:17:28 EDT}


{Politics.143.689}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 23:19:11 EDT (9 lines)

Show me the language in Republican plans for health care reform or
Medicare reform that excludes age rating bands.

And I'll show you 44 states that before the ACA could charge older
people at a 5:1 ratio to younger..and this only applied to people from
50-64 (pre-Medicare eligible).

And you think the ratio for even older, less healthy people would be
lower than 5:1?


{Politics.143.690}: Marc S {marc_dc} Thu, 17 Apr 2014 23:39:40 EDT (28 lines)

Here is the latest Republican Plan...Coburn-Burr-Hatch.

Not very good for seniors or anyone with a pre-existing condition.
Notice the 5:1 age rating band.

<Coburn-Burr-Hatch retains some popular Obamacare provisions

CBH would repeal Obamacare, and replace it with a set of more market-
oriented reforms. One key point right at the start: the authors
“believe our proposal is roughly budget neutral over a decade.” That
is to say, for all the reconfiguring it does to the health-care
system, it doesn’t substantially reduce the deficit. It may modestly
reduce the amount of federal spending and taxation. The Senate trio
aims to have their proposal fiscally scored by an outside group of
economists, most likely Doug Holtz-Eakin’s Center for Health and

While the plan would repeal Obamacare, it would preserve some of the
law’s most popular features, such as its ban on lifetime limits on
insurer payouts, and its requirement that insurers cover adult
children younger than 27. It would replace Obamacare’s premium hike on
young people, known as age-based community rating, with a more
traditional 5:1 rating band.

It wouldn’t maintain Obamacare’s individual mandate, nor its
requirement that insurers offer coverage to everyone regardless of
pre-existing health conditions....>


{Politics.143.691}: Elizabeth Costello {lizcostello} Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:40:43 EDT (13 lines)

Oh that vile free market.  The government is so much better at running
things.  Just look at their profit - oops.

Okay then look at how many people have risen up from poverty - oops

Well then look at how well they manage our money - oops

Well how about how smart they are?  LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Well you have to admit they reward their cronies and punish everyone

Yes I admit that.


{Politics.143.692}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Fri, 18 Apr 2014 21:03:14 EDT (34 lines)

America is on the verge of being overrun by ‘mad dash’ toward

Bill Moyers criticized both political parties on Friday for furthering
the “protection racket” built to protect the mega-rich from paying
their fair share of taxes while extending their influence over
politics. Many members of the “one percent” pay less taxes than the
average worker across the board, thanks to tax laws that were drawn up
not by nature or divine providence, but by legislators.

“It’s one way they have, as Chief Justice [John] Roberts put it, of
‘expressing gratitude toward their chief donors,’” Moyers said, before
launching into a mocking impersonation of Republican lawmakers doing
so for billionaire donor Sheldon Adelson. “‘Oh, Mister Adelson, we so
appreciate your generosity that we cut your estate taxes so that you
can give $8 billion as a tax repayment to your heirs, even though,
down the road, the public will have to put up $2.8 billion just to
compensate for the loss in tax revenue.”

He also previewed the upcoming study by professors at Northwestern and
Harvard which found that individual citizens and mass-based interest
groups have “little or no independent influence” on U.S. politics
compared to corporate interests, another demonstrator that, in Moyers’
view, made the argument by “courtiers of the rich” that inequality
does not matter especially “repugnant.”

“Of course it matters,” Moyers scoffed. “Inequality is what has turned
Washington into a protection racket for the one percent. It buys all
those goodies from government: tax breaks, tax havens, allowing
corporations and the rich to park their money in a no-tax zone.
Loopholes, favors like carried interest, on and on and on and on.”



{Politics.143.693}: Elizabeth Costello {lizcostello} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 09:33:17 EDT (2 lines)

Mr. one percent giving a lecture.  How sweet.  (He's right of course,
but a big hypocrite).  Maybe Enron advisor Krugman will chime in next.


{Politics.143.694}: Jay Hoffman {resist} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 10:25:15 EDT (3 lines)

Understanding and communicating how a corrupt system works so as tho
replace it, is a saving grace for those having leveraged it in their


{Politics.143.695}: Keith Rice {justinthyme} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 12:17:47 EDT (HTML)

Yet, US corporations have the highest tax rate in the world. Those lobbyists are really slacking.

" oecd"


{Politics.143.696}: Elizabeth Costello {lizcostello} Sat, 19 Apr 2014 16:20:51 EDT (3 lines)

CA is about to give Hollywood another huge tax break.  Schumer is
working on one for the entertainment industry in NY.  So odd they
think those things help the economy, but other  tax breaks hurt it.


Topic HomeTopicsForum HomeForumsHomeSearchSettingsHelpExit
Forum Guidelines
Guest-accessible forum This forum allows unregistered guests access to read. You must register to post in this forum.

You are in Guest mode. If you want to post, you'll need to register (we promise it's painless).
Registered users should log in now. (Forgot your password?)

The New Café  Home | Your Hotlist and Directory | Independent Partner Forums |
FAQ | User Guidelines | Privacy Policy