Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
The Left must always “trickle down” its definition of “wealthy” to pay for their programs.
At least there is a plan to actually pay for the programs.
Correct. Last time they were in charge, they put us 10 trillion dollars in more debt for their programs. Some plan.
See, you can't discuss this honestly. This is about Sanders idea on health care and how he will pay for it. It is not about "they". People like yourself can not discuss anything without trying to throw in things that are not even relevant and as I note above, massively hypocritical.
Imagining you da boss a me now? Here's an idea.. Do your own homework! And include them all!That's self-delusion. We're all both liberal and conservative by nature and necessity. Everyone budgets, except idiots like Trump.Non-Conservatives rarely consider spending cuts
Since you brought delusion into it, compare the last 3 Democrat Presidents in terms of Budget, Spending, and Debt to Trump.
And you know that how? Many construction trades are unionized. They get benefits for their workers.
Because to be on a health plan you have to have a S.S. number and it's a total lie that you can just steal one.
No, usually they are bought from the drug cartels or identity thieves either here or in Mexico. When was the last time an employer sponsored insurance company asked for proof of citizenship or SS number?
Anytime you sign up. You can not just use someone else's S.S. that is a total made up fabrication. Someone might be able to for very short term gain but it gets caught in short order.
Undocumented immigrants quietly pay billions into Social Security and receive no benefits - Marketplace
From your article.
Since undocumented immigrants don’t have Social Security numbers and are not authorized to work legally in the U.S., they are not eligible for any Social Security benefits, whether they’ve paid into the system or not.
Do you not see a problem with that statement?
People who claim these things talk out of both sides of their mouths and people who read it and buy into it don't use even a little common sense when reading it.
If someone uses a fake ID people would be getting their taxes rejected left and right because they are not claiming all their income. What you are arguing is some huge conspiracy where the government ignores any income that might seem like it came from an illegal. You are arguing that the government isn't going to question how it is that the 89 year old woman in Pennsylvania is butchering hogs in Iowa.
Now if you want to argue this, go ahead and I will simply ask you why it is that Trump continues to allow this to happen? He is the one that controls enforcement. I'll ask how it is that when he claimed he was going to arrest a million illegals he wasn't able to arrest hardly any? He knows exactly where they are because of the bogus use of S.S. numbers.
And then.............
Many undocumented sole proprietors, from gardeners to tech startup founders, pay self-employment taxes through an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, legally issued by the IRS.
Now anyone that would consider this for even one second would start to ask themselves questions. First off, how "many" illegals are going to send info to the government where their business is located? Unless it is well known that as long as you pay in the government is absolutely fine with you being here and working as long as you pay in.
Which in that case is the case. The government has no real desire to go after illegals. On a rare occasion you will get an arrest to pretend they are doing something. What happened at the last one? Once processed the illegals were returned to where they were picked up. Nothing at all happened to the employers and there hasn't been another even though if Trump was serious he would be doing this on a daily basis.
No, you are being lied to and gullible enough to believe and repeat it.
Not between the ears but rather two inches below the bleeding heart.Imagining you da boss a me now? Here's an idea.. Do your own homework! And include them all!That's self-delusion. We're all both liberal and conservative by nature and necessity. Everyone budgets, except idiots like Trump.Non-Conservatives rarely consider spending cuts
Since you brought delusion into it, compare the last 3 Democrat Presidents in terms of Budget, Spending, and Debt to Trump.
You made a subjective statement about Trump without any empirical data to back it up. At this point, it is simply matter that lies between your ears.
Failure of the Right, Surge in Single-Payer Support
While the Affordable Care Act is not fully implemented until 2014, in 2011 Bernie Sanders introduces a Senate companion bill to the American Health Security Act, which Rep. McDermott had continued sponsoring in the House since 1993. In 2016 Donald Trump is elected President along with Republican majorities in both houses, promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act. National opposition not only prevents the GOP "repeal and replace" effort, but leads to a surge in support for single-payer healthcare. By 2017 Rep. Conyers's Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act hits an historic high of 120 co-sponsors in the House, and Sen. Bernie Sanders introduces a new single-payer bill, the Medicare-for-All Act with 16 co-sponsors in the Senate.
People will always support free stuff.Failure of the Right, Surge in Single-Payer Support
While the Affordable Care Act is not fully implemented until 2014, in 2011 Bernie Sanders introduces a Senate companion bill to the American Health Security Act, which Rep. McDermott had continued sponsoring in the House since 1993. In 2016 Donald Trump is elected President along with Republican majorities in both houses, promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act. National opposition not only prevents the GOP "repeal and replace" effort, but leads to a surge in support for single-payer healthcare. By 2017 Rep. Conyers's Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act hits an historic high of 120 co-sponsors in the House, and Sen. Bernie Sanders introduces a new single-payer bill, the Medicare-for-All Act with 16 co-sponsors in the Senate.
Now adjust that for inflation.
Welcome to reality.
"Oh,I agree!" said thePeople will always support free stuff.Failure of the Right, Surge in Single-Payer Support
While the Affordable Care Act is not fully implemented until 2014, in 2011 Bernie Sanders introduces a Senate companion bill to the American Health Security Act, which Rep. McDermott had continued sponsoring in the House since 1993. In 2016 Donald Trump is elected President along with Republican majorities in both houses, promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act. National opposition not only prevents the GOP "repeal and replace" effort, but leads to a surge in support for single-payer healthcare. By 2017 Rep. Conyers's Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act hits an historic high of 120 co-sponsors in the House, and Sen. Bernie Sanders introduces a new single-payer bill, the Medicare-for-All Act with 16 co-sponsors in the Senate.
*sigh*
Silent Cal the last fiscally responsible man to occupy the Oval Office @ - $5 Billion
.. and that was when a $Billion was actually worth something.
So fiscally responsible he ushered in The Great Depression, yay!"I think the American people want a solemn ass as a President," he once told Ethel Barrymore, "and I think I will go along with them.
Some Trumpette was requesting "empirical data" supporting a statement I made about Trump not budgeting. He's clearly on track to match Obama's performance at best. As all know ,Reagan was the poster child for this sort of hypocrisy. "No! Not Reagan! Our hero! Never!"Welcome to reality.
U.S. Inflation Rate, $100 in 1977 to 2019
In other words, $100 in 1977 is equivalent in purchasing power to about $424.66 in 2019, a difference of $324.66 over 42 years. The 1977 inflation rate was 6.50%. The current inflation rate (2018 to 2019) is now 1.76%
There are a few caveats to keep in mind when thinking about this visualization. First off, the numbers represent inflation-adjusted dollars to make a fair comparison over several years.
I know Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren is a friend of mine. Still I can't speak for Elizabeth. But since as a nation we spent close to 10 trillion on health care in 2015 I'm not blown out of my socks by the numbers, no.Answer me this? Elizabeth Warren Medicare for all plan calls for spending $5.2 trillion a year on healthcare. In 2018 the federal government spent $4.1 trillion for everything. All of it. So you are telling me that we are going to jump from $4.1 trillion to $9.3 trillion and you think there is money out there to do that?Of course not. "Cutting spending" is just straw man distraction though like so many others. Medicare For All obviously includes huge "spending cuts" along with increases. The devil's always in the details. An opposing plan, given a serious one were ever submitted, would obviously contain the same.Naw, I just thought silly assertions were the new normal.We could. Are you arguing for that? I'm not.
Mine was not. We have a ton of overlap in the government. A ton of waste. Is there a reason you would be against addressing that?
Gee, you're slooooOOOOOwwww!!!I know Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren is a friend of mine. Still I can't speak for Elizabeth. But since as a nation we spent close to 10 trillion on health care in 2015 I'm not blown out of my socks by the numbers, no.Answer me this? Elizabeth Warren Medicare for all plan calls for spending $5.2 trillion a year on healthcare. In 2018 the federal government spent $4.1 trillion for everything. All of it. So you are telling me that we are going to jump from $4.1 trillion to $9.3 trillion and you think there is money out there to do that?Of course not. "Cutting spending" is just straw man distraction though like so many others. Medicare For All obviously includes huge "spending cuts" along with increases. The devil's always in the details. An opposing plan, given a serious one were ever submitted, would obviously contain the same.Naw, I just thought silly assertions were the new normal.
Mine was not. We have a ton of overlap in the government. A ton of waste. Is there a reason you would be against addressing that?
But since as a nation we spent close to 10 trillion on health care in 2015
That link shows dollars per capita, not $10 trillion in spending.
Gee, you're slooooOOOOOwwww!!!I know Elizabeth Warren. Elizabeth Warren is a friend of mine. Still I can't speak for Elizabeth. But since as a nation we spent close to 10 trillion on health care in 2015 I'm not blown out of my socks by the numbers, no.Answer me this? Elizabeth Warren Medicare for all plan calls for spending $5.2 trillion a year on healthcare. In 2018 the federal government spent $4.1 trillion for everything. All of it. So you are telling me that we are going to jump from $4.1 trillion to $9.3 trillion and you think there is money out there to do that?Of course not. "Cutting spending" is just straw man distraction though like so many others. Medicare For All obviously includes huge "spending cuts" along with increases. The devil's always in the details. An opposing plan, given a serious one were ever submitted, would obviously contain the same.Mine was not. We have a ton of overlap in the government. A ton of waste. Is there a reason you would be against addressing that?
But since as a nation we spent close to 10 trillion on health care in 2015
That link shows dollars per capita, not $10 trillion in spending.
"Welcome to reality."
Says the guy who's always slow on the uptake and never admits being wrong..Says the guy who didn't read his own link...….
Says the guy who's always slow on the uptake and never admits being wrong..Says the guy who didn't read his own link...….
As of 10 minutes ago I am the grandfather of twins!!!
