Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
President Trump President Trump

03-08-2017 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
I think we all agree we want to help those who really need it, but often times we find others who don't really need it are gaming the system and taking the resources away from those who do. So maybe we can create a system where if someone who is getting their healthcare heavily subsidized is caught 2-3 times with some combination of a list of goods they aren't allowed to have (similar to the one mentioned by mong above) they aren't allowed to receive the subsidy for 3 years (plus a fine?) and those savings will be spread around to others who need it. This could also apply to food stamps, welfare, etc.

Spoiler:
For the record I think an occasional starbucks is ok for some.
Suspicion and speculation of mooching combined with lording over what people have. Are you longing to become an overseer?
03-08-2017 , 12:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
I think we all agree we want to help those who really need it, but often times we find others who don't really need it are gaming the system and taking the resources away from those who do. So maybe we can create a system where if someone who is getting their healthcare heavily subsidized is caught 2-3 times with some combination of a list of goods they aren't allowed to have (similar to the one mentioned by mong above) they aren't allowed to receive the subsidy for 3 years (plus a fine?) and those savings will be spread around to others who need it. This could also apply to food stamps, welfare, etc.

Spoiler:
For the record I think an occasional starbucks is ok for some.
Are we applying this to people who get healthcare tax breaks or just to poor people?

No need to reply since we already know the answer.
03-08-2017 , 01:00 PM
Ooh, maybe there should be a law that if you have government healthcare and you don't bow to your middle class superiors then you lose your health care. BTW, if you are medically unable to bow there should be alternatives like averting one's gaze or a small offering of blood. We're not monsters
03-08-2017 , 01:03 PM
If they don't buy phones or TVs how is The Man gonna monitor them for having banned healthcare-disqualifying products? House-to-house inspections for job growth.
03-08-2017 , 01:09 PM

https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/stat...97860899090433
03-08-2017 , 01:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez
i think the left wing hysteria is affecting peoples better judgement. i'm all for investigation and pursuing leads but the left just seems to be getting way ahead of itself here. slow down, theres not some sort of perjury slam dunk here. far from it. you're at a 9 when you should probably be closer to 5

Not surprising Trumpets would be wholly incapable of identifying obvious and egregious lies given their leader lies EVERY SINGLE DAY, and usually more than once.

So forgive us when none of us believe trump supporters are in any way, shape or form capable or competent to identify when someone is lying.
03-08-2017 , 01:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
Can you expand on why you think health care is so different than almost every other product/service that is controlled by the law of supply and demand?
Sure.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/41...mpion-1135068/

Enjoy learning.
03-08-2017 , 02:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpanko
This is incredibly ignorant and incredibly racist. How often do you interact with anyone from a low SES? Do you think people enjoy being poor? That they're intentionally being irresponsible with any money they make?
What race is he being racist against?

Even if he doesn't interact with poor people doesn't mean he is not qualified to have an opinion on what can help poor people.

No, most people don't enjoy being poor. However, a lot of poor people make terrible financial decisions. Are you against trying we shouldn't try to help them a little bit or do you just disagree with mong's process of helping?
03-08-2017 , 03:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Side note - it's amazing how easily Trumpkins were fooled into supporting standard Republican orthodoxy. Rich people are going to get significant tax cuts out of this and health care access for the poor is going to be significantly reduced.

What does all this do for the poor white coal miner in West Virginia, or the hardscrabble unemployed steel worker in Pennsylvania, or whoever the avatar of the Trump election might be? Nothing, of course (going to be harder for them to get/afford health insurance now), but who cares, all the rich bigwigs who donated to the Trump campaign are going to save millions (not an exaggeration) in taxes and that's what's important, right?

MAGA!
Continuing this theme, Trumpkins ITT now want the poor white coal miner in West Virginia, or the hardscrabble unemployed steel worker in Pennsylvania, to take their kids' tablet away and sell it in order to afford the increased healthcare premiums they're about to get slapped with courtesy of Donald Trump and the GOP.

The GOP has taken all that populist rage at the system that left the Rust Belt out to dry and successfully redirected it into doing the same **** Republicans have always done, taking services away from the poor to give the rich big tax cuts. And all the Trumpkins here support it.
03-08-2017 , 03:08 PM
It always amazes me how easily the Republicans fool their poor voters.



Quote:
1 iPhone: Copays for medications on a white-glove group plan, $100/month--standard if, for example, you have a child with a chronic condition or you have a disability: $1,200

1+ iPhones: Cost of two EpiPens (Mylan) at their August 2016 price: $1,212

2 iPhones: Annual insurance premiums, group family plan, via an extremely generous employer-provided insurance plan: $2,050

2.5 iPhones: Maximum in 2017 for a flex spending account, pretax money that must be spent under "use it or lose it" rules: $2,660

5 iPhones (at least): Hospital costs of giving birth, no complications, with "good" insurance: $5,000

~7 iPhones: Health Savings Plan: Maximum HSA contribution for 2017: $6,750 for a family, often paired with high-deductible plans for which you're already paying premiums

8 iPhones: People on Medicare paying out of pocket for cancer treatment: up to about $8,000, beyond premiums

12 iPhones: Premiums for private insurance for a family; annual: $12,000

14 iPhones: Out-of-pocket maximum for a family plan before benefits kick in, this one on the Healthcare.gov exchange for 2017: $14,300

60 iPhones: The estimated annual costs to provide therapies and other supports for an autistic child: $60,000
https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywi.../#30e13108563a
03-08-2017 , 03:10 PM
Once again, Republicans are completely out of touch with reality on health insurance.

Quote:
Employer-provided health insurance costs 25 iPhones for the average family, although the employer pays most of that. The family is only on the hook for about seven iPhones.

High deductible plans are common, and the average deductible for employees is two iPhones. If you have a smaller employer, you will probably pay more iPhones than that.

If you get your insurance from the Marketplace (in other words, you have what some call an “Obamacare plan”), your out-of-pocket cost is much lower. Here’s an example for a 40-year old non-smoker who makes $30,000 a year; depending on where this person lives, their premiums could be anywhere from three to 12 iPhones per year.
Quote:
If you twist your knee in New York City and need an ACL repair surgery (as I did a few years ago), Health Care Blue Book says that a “fair” charge is 24 iPhones.

If you decide to have a baby—or if you don’t have that choice thanks in part to the bill’s defunding Planned Parenthood—pushing it out will cost you an average of 12 iPhones. This varies by location, of course, with some San Francisco hospitals charging 38 iPhones. Oh, and this isn’t counting prenatal care, anesthesia, c-sections, or complications that you or the baby might develop.

If, instead, you choose to have cancer, chemotherapy is also going to set you back quite a few iPhones. We’re looking at 113 to 218 iPhones for a typical course of breast cancer chemo, not counting other care or procedures you might end up needing. Or, to put it in simpler terms, a stack of iPhones two-and-a-half to five feet tall.
http://vitals.lifehacker.com/here-s-...for-1793056384
03-08-2017 , 03:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
What race is he being racist against?

Even if he doesn't interact with poor people doesn't mean he is not qualified to have an opinion on what can help poor people.

No, most people don't enjoy being poor. However, a lot of poor people make terrible financial decisions. Are you against trying we shouldn't try to help them a little bit or do you just disagree with mong's process of helping?
1. Don't play coy, it's obvious from his post who he is suggesting from the poor community is being financially irresponsible.

2. What in his post would qualify as "an opinion on what can help poor people?" What exactly is mong's "process of helping" that he was proposing in his post?

Last edited by shpanko; 03-08-2017 at 03:33 PM.
03-08-2017 , 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
What race is he being racist against?

Even if he doesn't interact with poor people doesn't mean he is not qualified to have an opinion on what can help poor people.

No, most people don't enjoy being poor. However, a lot of poor people make terrible financial decisions. Are you against trying we shouldn't try to help them a little bit or do you just disagree with mong's process of helping?
Failure to understand the people you have an opinion about may result in authoritarian bigotry and racism.
03-08-2017 , 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shpanko
1. Don't play coy, it's obvious from his post who he is suggesting from the poor community is being financially irresponsible.

2. What in his post would qualify as "an opinion on what can help poor people?" What exactly is mong's "process of helping" that he was proposing in his post?
1. I assume it is African Americans since African Americans women love starbucks.

2. Why did you ask, "How often do you interact with anyone from a low SES?"
03-08-2017 , 04:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
This is an older article by Chris Hayes of MSNBC, but it's a great primer for just how stupid Econ 101 actually makes people.

Quote:
The simple models have an explanatory power that is thrilling. Once you've grasped the aggregate supply/aggregate demand model, you understand why stimulating demand may lead, in the short run, to growth, but will also produce inflation. But the content of that understanding turns out to be a bit thin. Inflation happens because, well, that's where the lines intersect. “A little economics can be a dangerous thing,” a friend working on her Ph.D in public policy at the U. of C. told me. “An intro econ course is necessarily going to be superficial. You deal with highly stylized models that are robbed of context, that take place in a world unmediated by norms and institutions. Much of the most interesting work in economics right now calls into question the Econ 101 assumptions of rationality, individualism, maximizing behavior, etc. But, of course, if you don't go any further than Econ 101, you won't know that the textbook models are not the way the world really works, and that there are tons of empirical studies out there that demonstrate this.”
03-08-2017 , 04:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
1. I assume it is African Americans since African Americans women love starbucks.

2. Why did you ask, "How often do you interact with anyone from a low SES?"
1. Oh please, fine, keep playing dumb.

2. Because his post indicated he has no understanding of the daily life / challenges of the people he's criticizing.
03-08-2017 , 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
Can you expand on why you think health care is so different than almost every other product/service that is controlled by the law of supply and demand?
As I understand it the majority of studies of demand elasticity for healthcare (this is a measure of how well the "law of supply and demand" applies) have found demand for healthcare to be somewhere between highly inelastic and somewhat inelastic. It does appear that there is no universally agreed upon "right" way to measure this, so I wouldn't suggest it was a completely settled issue.

However, that healthcare demand would be inelastic makes sense intuitively for life-and-death decisions, both because you aren't likely to decide that it's preferable to die (or let a loved-one die) than to spend an extra marginal dollar but also because in the situations where you have to make those decisions you don't have the capacity to make them in the kind of rational and deliberative way econ 101 assumes.

Another explanation for a relative lack of elasticity even in healthcare services which aren't a matter of life and death is that price is mostly hidden from consumers because of the way we purchase healthcare via monolithic insurance policies. This latter cause could perhaps be ameliorated by changing the way we buy healthcare but it's hard to imagine how you remove the first.
03-08-2017 , 05:06 PM
The point of contention probably isn't in thinking that poor people are in part poor because they make bad financial decisions - it's in suggesting that we should be apathetic because they're in some way complicit.

Of course no one really believes so strongly in this kind of austerity that they'd subject their own children to the cold realities of life if they weren't strapped for cash, even if it did in some way create a cycle of dependency. They just don't think that all peoples lives matter in the same way so they don't want to legislate that kind of compassion. This is clearly the way donald trump thinks (and the reason why he's had such a rich history of unethical business practices that prey on the weak) and he's purposefully selected a group of people who agree. He thinks that if people are smart then they'll eventually find their way, and working class shmucks are just marks for the strong to use however they see fit.
03-08-2017 , 05:08 PM
Following Trump as he live-tweets his Tuesday morning hours-long viewing of Fox and Friends to the world

The president of the US sits in front of the TV for hours and tweets at the show he's watching. Incredible.
03-08-2017 , 05:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by juan valdez
im not defending carson because i haven't paid attention to what he said but what i do know is that the left is hyper sensitive, prone to twisting meaning and peoples motives, and misinformed about history
Probably beyond the scope of this thread, but the reason liberals are sensitive about racism is 1) there is an active racist lobbying block in this country and 2) the camapaign against racism has been so successful that racists have to hide their true beliefs. (e. g., "We hate black culture not black people.") Some people are simply dupes who have fallen for the rebranding of racism as cultural commentary on the increasing sagginess of pants. Others are extremely race conscious and get offended by black characters in science fiction.

Quote:
slavery is a much bigger part of global history than people realize. in a lot of ways surfs were close enough to slaves to categorize them similarly. its all forms and degrees of oppression. the history of humanity is a history of oppression. thats global, not some localized abomination which it seems to be treated as any time it gets brought up. people are so sensitive to this part of history it seems they haven't really wrapped their head around ordinary it was in recent global history
And here we have an argument that is almost word for word what you would find in a Klan manifesto. Hey, American slavery wasn't so bad. Hey, the Holocaust was kinda bad, but lots of other bad things happened, so why are we talking about this still? Chattel slavery is not so ordinary that I or any other white person reading this can trace our heritage back to it the way that nearly every black person in this country can. The effort to reform the institution of slavery is a telltale sign of white nationalism. It's not even necessary for white nationalism, but in the race-obsessed minds of the vdare crowd, you MUST defend the virtue of dead white slaveholders. The real "evil" in the world occurs in black ghettos, committed by blacks and their inferior culture. The white race enslaved generations of their forefathers, but that was just peer pressure because everyone was doing it. Those people were good Christians.

So when Carson starts talking about slavery as "immigration" it fits right in with the reclamation program. I don't think that's his intention, but there needs to be pushback against the terrible idea that slavery was no big deal, just white kids blowing off steam. Not like that monster Trayvon Martin who stole something once, the blogs tell me.
03-08-2017 , 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bahbahmickey
Why did you say you would address my question and then immediately go off on a tangent about something else?

My question was why would healthcare react differently than almost every other product and service out there when it comes to supply and demand? Which is to ask, when less people are buying health insurance (this is supply going down) why do you believe the costs will increase?

I am not disagreeing with your tangent by the way. I agree we need young and healthy people to pay (more than "their fair share" as a liberal would say) for part of old and sick peoples health insurance. I also agree that if we don't force (see: fine) the young & healthy to subsidize the old people's healthcare then costs are going to go even higher.
Healthcare is unlike other goods in services in a couple important ways. First off, the supply is tightly regulated by the AMA.

Secondly, healthcare is often times a very urgently needed good, there is not time to shop around for a better price.

Thirdly, the information asymmetry between the doctor and patient is immense. Even if it was in the patient's best interest to shop around, he or she often does not even know this.

EDIT: I agree HSA limits should be increased. I love it because I will incur significant health care costs in the 20-30 year range and can prepay for them now. But this does not help the average American who does not even fund their 401k and cannot afford a $1,000 emergency. The GOP is comically out of touch with the average American family's finances.
03-08-2017 , 07:40 PM
Do the ultra-right wingers from Scandinavia and the ultra-right wingers from the US just agree not to talk to each other about health insurance?
03-08-2017 , 08:33 PM
Since they talk about how bad Muslims are 99% of the time it just never comes up.
03-08-2017 , 08:39 PM
Them frisky young turks been investigating folks reading materials.

      
m