Trump to cut $2.7t from domestic programs...Is the FSA pissing themselves?

[Harpy Eagle]

Social security and Medicare won't be touched as it's political suicide. Make cuts to Dept of commerce and others like that.

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Social security and Medicare won't be touched as it's political suicide. Make cuts to Dept of commerce and others like that.

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

What I would like to do for just one year is once the budget is set is have the IRS adjust taxes on the whole fucking nation to cover the cost of the budget. Let people see what we are really spending and how much it cost them. I am betting the call to cut spending would be heard all the way to the moon and back.

Would you be willing to do that, or are you happy with being a freeloader and passing it off to the next generations?

 

[bripat9643]

Social security and Medicare won't be touched as it's political suicide. Make cuts to Dept of commerce and others like that.

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

What I would like to do for just one year is once the budget is set is have the IRS adjust taxes on the whole fucking nation to cover the cost of the budget. Let people see what we are really spending and how much it cost them. I am betting the call to cut spending would be heard all the way to the moon and back.

Would you be willing to do that, or are you happy with being a freeloader and passing it off to the next generations?

You have to be an idiot to support automatic tax increases to pay for whatever the sleazebags in Congress wants to spend. You are a fool if you believe politicians are ever going to cut spending.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

What I would like to do for just one year is once the budget is set is have the IRS adjust taxes on the whole fucking nation to cover the cost of the budget. Let people see what we are really spending and how much it cost them. I am betting the call to cut spending would be heard all the way to the moon and back.

Would you be willing to do that, or are you happy with being a freeloader and passing it off to the next generations?

You have to be an idiot to support automatic tax increases to pay for whatever the sleazebags in Congress wants to spend. You are a fool if you believe politicians are ever going to cut spending.

The sleazebags in Congress do what we allow them to do. I do not believe politicians are ever going to cut spending because there are too many people like you that will just keep on voting them into office no matter what they do. Every time you vote for one of them, you become just as guilty as them

 

[bripat9643]

Social security and Medicare won't be touched as it's political suicide. Make cuts to Dept of commerce and others like that.

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

the problem there is they are so tiny that cutting 10 to 20 percent from them will make very little difference.

it will take more than that to start getting things under control.

not saying we should not cut them all by 10%, but it will take more.

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

Why would they cut spending when you sheep keep putting them in to office no matter how much they spend?

 

[bripat9643]

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

What I would like to do for just one year is once the budget is set is have the IRS adjust taxes on the whole fucking nation to cover the cost of the budget. Let people see what we are really spending and how much it cost them. I am betting the call to cut spending would be heard all the way to the moon and back.

Would you be willing to do that, or are you happy with being a freeloader and passing it off to the next generations?

You have to be an idiot to support automatic tax increases to pay for whatever the sleazebags in Congress wants to spend. You are a fool if you believe politicians are ever going to cut spending.

The sleazebags in Congress do what we allow them to do. I do not believe politicians are ever going to cut spending because there are too many people like you that will just keep on voting them into office no matter what they do. Every time you vote for one of them, you become just as guilty as them

All you're saying is that the system is rigged against the tax payer. Voting for that idiot libertarian didn't lower your taxes one bit, now did it? How are you not guilty of allowing tax and spend douchebags to get into office?

 

[bripat9643]

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

Why would they cut spending when you sheep keep putting them in to office no matter how much they spend?

Did voting for Gary Johnson keep them from getting into office?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

Why would they cut spending when you sheep keep putting them in to office no matter how much they spend?

Did voting for Gary Johnson keep them from getting into office?

nope, because there are too many sheep like you. As long as you and those like you are alive, we are fucked because you just do not care.

 

[bripat9643]

Just funding them at their current level would eliminate the debt in a decade.

I much prefer G5000s idea of getting rid of all tax expenditures. Quit using the tax code for social engineering. If we make the same amount of money you should not pay less than me just because you have a mortgage and I do not or just because you have kids and I do not.

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

Why would they cut spending when you sheep keep putting them in to office no matter how much they spend?

They are never going to cut spending, period. This system is doomed to implode. There's no way to fix it other than to secede from it.

 

[bripat9643]

In other words, you support increasing taxes.

no, i support paying for what we spend, not pushing it down the road. Do you support this? Do you think that deficit spending in a robust economy is a bad thing?

You're a tax and spend leftwinger, in other words. You believe we are obligated to bend over and take it up the ass, no matter how much Congress spends.

Fuck that.

I support a fair tax system that has one purpose, that of collecting revenue, not influencing behavior.

Good for you. Then work on abolishing the income tax, because that is the only way it's going to happen.

Tax expenditures...What are tax expenditures and how are they structured?

"The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 defines tax expenditures as “revenue losses attributable to provisions of the Federal tax laws which allow a special exclusion, exemption, or deduction from gross income or which provide a special credit, a preferential rate of tax, or a deferral of tax liability.” These provisions are meant to support favored activities or assist favored groups of taxpayers. "

Tell me how this is even legal? The Constitution says that we shall have equal protection, but then favored actives and groups get special tax breaks that other so not get. Why should my co-worker who makes the exact same amount of money as I do pay less in taxes just because he has 4 kids?

If we got rid of tax expenditures we could lower the tax rate across the board because we would not need it to be so high to offset the tax expenditures.

The "tax expenditures" scam is just a way to fool the public into approve an increase in taxes.

Fuck that. Let them cut spending first.

Why would they cut spending when you sheep keep putting them in to office no matter how much they spend?

Did voting for Gary Johnson keep them from getting into office?

nope, because there are too many sheep like you. As long as you and those like you are alive, we are fucked because you just do not care.

We are all fucked, regardless of who I vote for. This system is doomed to implode. It's inevitable.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They are never going to cut spending, period. This system is doomed to implode. There's no way to fix it other than to secede from it.

Why would they? Every election you and those like you tell them to keep up the good work. Every election you and those like you tell them "keep on spending, we do not mind".

 

[bripat9643]

They are never going to cut spending, period. This system is doomed to implode. There's no way to fix it other than to secede from it.

Why would they? Every election you and those like you tell them to keep up the good work. Every election you and those like you tell them "keep on spending, we do not mind".

They are never going to cut spending, period. There is simply nothing I can do to stop them. This system is designed to implode. There is no reverse on the process. All the incentives politicians face are to increase spending. And they are never going to approve any measures that alter those incentives.

Just get used to the idea that the United States will become a socialist dictatorship in a matter of decades.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

They are never going to cut spending, period. There is simply nothing I can do to stop them. This system is designed to implode. There is no reverse on the process. All the incentives politicians face are to increase spending. And they are never going to approve any measures that alter those incentives.

Just get used to the idea that the United States will become a socialist dictatorship in a matter of decades.

If this is true, why do you keep voting for them since it just does not matter?

but instead you are a willing and happy participant in the downfall of the country.

 

[BrokeLoser]

You gave zero fucks about the deficit when Barack Hussein was in office, what changed?

fuck, you people are so boring. I have cared about the deficit since GH Bush was in office, in fact it was his lies and spending that drove me from the Repub party. Tried the Dems once and have never gone back to the duopoly.

As for you though, you gave a million fucks about the deficit when Barack Hussein was in office and now you do not care at all, what changed?

"It drove you from the Republican party?" I remember a previous post where you admitted you used to be a Democrat. You still defend them.

I was never a Dem, I voted for a Dem for POTUS once, that was in 1992. I was a Repub for the 10 years prior to that.

That was the last time I voted for either major party for POTUS.

I do not defend the Dems, that is a lie. I am willing to bet you cannot find a single post of me doing so.

I only see you attacking Pubs. I've also caught you taking the Dim's side on numerous issues.

I agree with the Dems on some issues, I agree with the Repubs on some issues. That is what is known as not being a sheep and thinking for myself.

I get called a Trumpian/righty on a regular basis by the folks on the left.

NO...you're a full blown Lefty and everybody here knows it but you...You simply like guns a little bit and you think you're fiscally responsible...that's all.

The fact is you did not participate in the election in any meaningful way so how dare you criticize the outcome of an election you did not participate in? In 2020 make a responsible choice and then you will have some credibility when you complain.

nice try little man, but my vote was just as meaningful as that of 54 million other Americans that voted for the losing candidate in a state.

In 2020 I will do as I always do, and vote for the best candidate.

In other words you intend to play no part in choosing the next president.

I will play the same part as the 54 4 million other Americans that voted for the losing candidate in a state do.

You seem terribly confused about our system for selecting a president.

I understand it perfectly andI understand you do not take voting as a serious responsibility. You shirked your responsibility in favor of a private pout.

I voted for the best possible candidate. That is what is known as taking voting as a serious responsibility. You people who voted based on the letter next to the person, no matter who the person is, are the ones that have traded your responsibility for party affiliation.

Certainly there are some wackos who believe that PeeWee Herman would make a great President; them writing his name in is no different than you doing what you do.

Bullshit. Taking voting seriously means voting for the best candidate who has a chance of winning. Adults make choices all the time between things that do not match up to all their preferences. That's what behaving responsible means.

What was the chance that Trump was going to win California?

What was Hillary's chance of winning Wyoming?

Neither Trump nor Hillary had any chance of winning those states, and yet people still voted for them knowing they would not win the state.

in our system, all that matters is who wins the state.

So why do you waste your time voting? Do you have that kind of time to blow? Why even get interested in national elections?
Republicans in Mexifornia knew they were wasting their time but atleast there was a 'what if'.......You don't have a 'what if' in play bud...Stay home.

 

[skews13]

President Trump has certainly done a bang up job thus far reducing our debt and deficit.

You do know the increases in the national debt are due to medicare and Social Security, right? In fact, the majority of the national debt is because of medicare and Social Security.

It's not like President Trump just bumped to debt up or anything.

The national debt is the result of the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush tax cuts, and the Trump tax cuts. Every dime of it.

Social Security cannot add to the debt by law, and is paid for through payroll taxes.

You have to be a liar, because nobody can possibly be that fucking stupid.

 

[toomuchtime_]

So you are saying 1/4 of the people in Utah played no part in choosing the next president.

Actually, in the last election 54.5% of the people of Utah played no part in choosing the current president.

Not true. Losing an election does not mean you intentionally when you voted for some one who might have won is not the same as throwing your vote away on a private pout.

They choose to vote for someone that had no chances to win the state, and winning the state is all that matters in our system. Hillary had no more chance of winning Utah than Johnson my state.

The people that live in Cali and voted for Trump knew he had zero chance of winning the state, but they did it anyhow. That is no different than what I do.

It's very different. Even if they knew Hillary couldn't win, a large percentage of voters vote a straight ticket, so they might be electing other Democrats, and a lot of voters hope against hope that their candidate will win.

So, what you are saying is that if one is a partisan sheep like you and votes straight ticket, it is ok to vote for someone that has no chance to win. But if you refuse to be a slave to the two parties and vote with a brain instead of who I am told to vote for, then it is not ok to vote for someone that has no chance to win.

what ever helps you sleep at night.

First off, let's not speculate about you having a brain or not being a sheep. If either of those were true, we would not be having this conversation. You did not make a mature decision and vote for someone who had a chance of winning precisely because you are a slave to an ideology that has no chance of ever making a difference in the US, and if you had a brain, you would not be calling everyone who disagrees with a sheep, since you clearly are a sheep.

As it says at the bottom of my post, "a belief is not an idea the mind possesses, it is an idea that possesses the mind." You need to consider how this applies to you.

I live in a blue state that all the polls had given to Clinton, but I voted for Trump anyway because I had known for years that Clinton was stupid and irresponsible, something the polls could not factor, and she certainly didn't disappoint me. As the polls got closer and closer, she stopped campaigning here and Trump doubled down on campaigning here and he won the state by a very small margin. If Hillary had won, my vote would still have been meaningful because I was trying to influence the election. You just dropped out.

 

[gipper]

Cut the DOD (the original name was more apt, War Department) by at least 75%. Eliminate the NSA, Homeland Security, and CIA. Bingo! No more deficit and a lot more freedom at home.

In today's GOP there are two breeds. The first wants the dismantling of our military and defense apparatus. The second wants to spend money like there's no tomorrow. I guess they've really returned to being the party of Lincoln. You know, back when the Republicans were liberals.

You forgot to add that the D Party is no different.

I am forgetting nothing. I merely reject the idea that the GOP should emulate the Democrats.

They shouldn’t emulate the Ds, but they do.

 

[debbiedowner]

Trump budget would put an end to some drug-cost help under Medicare Part D

Retirees with high prescription drug costs might want to keep an eye on President Trump's hoped-for changes to Medicare.

The president's proposed 2020 budget, released Monday, calls for allowing Medicare to negotiate lower prices with pharmaceutical companies and would cap how much beneficiaries pay out-of-pocket under Part D prescription drug coverage, among other provisions. Yet it also would get rid of some help that beneficiaries receive for their medicines.

On top of eliminating help with generic drug costs for low-income Medicare recipients, the budget would stop allowing manufacturer discounts to count toward a beneficiary's out-of-pocket costs during the so-called coverage gap under Part D.

"If those discounts are no longer counted, it means people would spend longer in the coverage gap and spend more out of pocket," said Mary Johnson, Social Security and Medicare policy analyst for The Senior Citizens League. "Those discounts currently are 70 percent of the cost of a drug."

Medicare Part D's coverage gap, or "donut hole," is the time between a drug plan's coverage limit ($3,820 for 2019) and the threshold for qualifying for catastrophic coverage ($5,100 for 2019), which is when your share of the cost drops.

While Medicare beneficiaries now pay 25 percent for brand-name drugs during that gap — the same share before reaching the drug plan's limit — they also have been able to count manufacturer discounts toward their out-of-pocket costs while in the gap. That helps them reach the catastrophic phase of coverage faster.

Some retirees with lower income get extra help to cover the cost of their medicine. Others, however, have too much income to qualify for assistance but nevertheless struggle to pay the cost of their prescriptions — which can lead to drastic choices.

"They start cutting tablets in half to stretch out their medicine, or use credit cards to pay," said Elizabeth Gavino, founder of Lewin & Gavino in New York and an independent broker and general agent for Medicare plans. "For some, it's a choice of taking medicine or buying food."

Adding to the potential woes for those already struggling is the impending expiration at the end of 2019 of an Affordable Care Act provision that limited annual increases in the threshold for catastrophic coverage. Over the past nine years, yearly increases have totaled $550 altogether.

In 2020, however, the threshold is projected to jump by $1,250 to $6,350 from $5,100 this year, according to the 2018 Medicare trustees report. Beyond that, the increase is expected to average $450 each year through 2027, at which point the out-of-pocket threshold would hit $9,450.

"That's a huge amount of money for future retirees or people retiring today who will be paying that much more," Johnson said.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So why do you waste your time voting? Do you have that kind of time to blow? Why even get interested in national elections?
Republicans in Mexifornia knew they were wasting their time but atleast there was a 'what if'.......You don't have a 'what if' in play bud...Stay home.

Dude, my vote had the exact same impact on the election that yours did. You fucking slaves to the party are just amazing. Hell, Johnson was fewer votes behind the winner in my state than Trump was in yours. Yet you still voted for him knowing that it was a wasted vote.

such a mindless drone you are.