DescentBB

tunnelcat wrote:If the "rich" can't afford health care, I mean "health insurance" slick, we have a problem. I'm not even super rich, but it's going to be a sizable hit for me next year and for the next 5 years until I reach Medicare age because I'm essentially on a fixed income for the rest of my retired life. However, health care premiums keep on rising. I'm heading into diminishing return territory. The whole country is. Too high for subsidies and too low to be comfortable with shelling out that much cash per month. Therein lies the problem.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/07/1 ... yptr=yahoo

it isn't that the rich cannot afford it, it is that the burden has been falling more heavily on them, AS WAS DESIGNED. Anyone who cannot afford to buy the platinum plan, with virtually nothing out of pocket, isn't even upper middle class, let alone rich, so the notion is laughable. As I told you before, TC, I'm 60, and if your income is too low to handle a 20K per annum sum to cover healthcare(insurance, plus), I don't see how you don't qualify for some subsidy. I think Hillary's idea about stretching Medicare down to age 55 as a public option might serve you well, if you don't have the slack in the budget.

So once again slick tries to be the pandering mouth piece for Obamacare. Yeah, if you can't handle 20k a year then something must be wrong with you and not Obamacare.

yup.

callmeslick wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:If the "rich" can't afford health care, I mean "health insurance" slick, we have a problem. I'm not even super rich, but it's going to be a sizable hit for me next year and for the next 5 years until I reach Medicare age because I'm essentially on a fixed income for the rest of my retired life. However, health care premiums keep on rising. I'm heading into diminishing return territory. The whole country is. Too high for subsidies and too low to be comfortable with shelling out that much cash per month. Therein lies the problem.

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/07/1 ... yptr=yahoo

it isn't that the rich cannot afford it, it is that the burden has been falling more heavily on them, AS WAS DESIGNED. Anyone who cannot afford to buy the platinum plan, with virtually nothing out of pocket, isn't even upper middle class, let alone rich, so the notion is laughable. As I told you before, TC, I'm 60, and if your income is too low to handle a 20K per annum sum to cover healthcare(insurance, plus), I don't see how you don't qualify for some subsidy. I think Hillary's idea about stretching Medicare down to age 55 as a public option might serve you well, if you don't have the slack in the budget.

My income is not too low, but it's not comfortably higher either. If premiums keep rising at the rate they've been, I will eventually have to choose between paying for food, shelter, transportation or medical care, because that medical care piece is quickly taking a larger and larger chunk out of my relatively fixed and not rising income. The current system is broken, but the Republicans don't have a better solution than to nuke Obamacare. Worse, Ryan wants to increase the age of Medicare eligibility. Not in my lifetime. Even eliminating Obamacare will not fix things. So all those Trump lovers who think that he has "the solution" are delusional.

as I said, Clinton's proposal should suit you just fine, then. I was pleasantly surprised when she proposed it. Clearly an olive branch to the Sanders wing, but that is how politics is supposed to work, right?

I guess the only way to find out is to elect her. Ick. But the alternative that Trump and Ryan are pushing is horrifying.

don't forget that paragon of empathy, Mike Pence, who suggested that Indiana could not have a rape exception in their anti-abortion law, because, sweartogawd, he claimed women would SEEK TO GET RAPED to get abortions.

I don't know who's worse, Pence or Trump, not that any of those out of Trump's choice pool was a shining example of humanity. Dear God, if these guys get elected.............. I just wish the Dems had NOT queened Clinton. Idiots! Anybody but her. I'm now essentially having to vote for the lesser of 2 evils and I know there will be big downsides to either choice.

callmeslick wrote:don't forget that paragon of empathy, Mike Pence, who suggested that Indiana could not have a rape exception in their anti-abortion law, because, sweartogawd, he claimed women would SEEK TO GET RAPED to get abortions.

Annnnnd....once again slick, you come off as Trump like in quoting fake comments. Did you get this from the National Enquirer? On the same page as Moth Man no doubt:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-allowi ... get-raped/

I noticed vision and TG didn't catch you on this like they would of if I made the post. Nice to have sycophants I guess

woodchip, I'm no fan of an Evangelical fanatic like Pence, but you are correct that he never said such a thing. But Pence has his warts. He's for those "religious freedom" laws that essentially allow legalized discrimination against LGBT people. I see business interests forced him to roll back that law. Tsk, tsk. Trump himself has been fairly open about supporting gay rights.

Pence has also said that he's "for" the TPP, something that Hillary was also for, until Bernie pushed back. Trump is still campaigning against the TPP last I heard, or maybe he's flip flopping. So who's going to prevail and who do you agree with woody? Your boy Trump, or the second banana, Pence. I also wonder how long Pence will take being interrupted by big mouth Trump when he's trying to speak for himself?

Mike Pence wrote:" (2014)Trade means jobs, but trade also means security. The time has come for all of us to urge the swift adoption of the Trans Pacific Partnership."

More Pence and Trump "disagreements".

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... jor-issues

The last stage of decaying capitalism. Karl Marx was right about the future of capitalism, when he wrote "Das Kapital". Capitalism devours himself more than others.

Hey sigma buddy, maybe pull the beam out of your own eye before you go worrying about the mote in another's.

TG, you are exhibiting a poetic streak...I like it.

Dammit slick, you know you can't spread bull★■◆● like 'pence encourages rape for abortions' around here. It's not a Nirvana song there.

Come on man, you had to know that was egregious.

sigma wrote:The last stage of decaying capitalism. Karl Marx was right about the future of capitalism, when he wrote "Das Kapital". Capitalism devours himself more than others.

Well, in Russia, the same could be said for Communism. Which of your systems do you prefer sigma, the old version from Soviet Union, or the current version from today's Russia? Isn't today's Russia a little more open and free for it's citizens or does Putin rule unilaterally? I am a little confused as to what to call the current Russian government system today. In fact, what would you call the current system that's being lead by Putin? Socialist? Communist? Capitalist?

...and let's not forget... REALLY BAD HEALTHCARE.

tunnelcat wrote: I am a little confused as to what to call the current Russian government system today. In fact, what would you call the current system that's being lead by Putin? Socialist? Communist? Capitalist?

The political system Putin is in charge of is called……………a dictatorship.

I'd like to hear what sigma believes. He does live there after all, unlike us.

Your pen pal believes what he is told to believe.