Trump lies about pre-existing conditions right to voter's face

[Threegoofs]

The CNN source established that it did.

What exactly are you arguing? That the 2017 GOP bill was written with the intention of extending a portion of the ACA?

Love how in one thread, CNN are dastardly liars, but here, they are the purveyors of truth.

 

[Greenbeard]

The debate is a week away, let’s see what Trump has to say, I’m sure Wallace will highlight healthcare.

Who cares what he says on the debate stage? His brief asking the SCOTUS to bring back pre-existing conditions was filed months ago. He regulations creating a shadow market of health plans that can discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions went into effect over a year ago. His actions speak louder than whatever canned lies he's been practicing.

 

[Conservative]

Who cares what he says on the debate stage? His brief asking the SCOTUS to bring back pre-existing conditions was filed months ago. He regulations creating a shadow market of health plans that can discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions went into effect over a year ago. His actions speak louder than whatever canned lies he's been practicing.

What is it in your DNA that supports someone else paying for your personal responsibility issues? Do you really support taking from someone else to support you?

 

[Quag]

It's amazing that anyone can deceive him or herself enough to believe him.

Trump deceives himself all the time

 

[Casper]

Jakie, read the thread lol.

And watch Fox every once in a blue moon so your assumptions about Republicans are not based off biased threads and/or CNN coverage.

The Republican sponsored 2017 bill protected pre-existing conditions.

The Court would not strike down the ACA until this Spring, by which time we will have passed a replacement bill.

I’m not sure how old you are, but I feel like some of the college aged posters in this forum have no clue how bad it was under Obamacare. It was basically what pushed Trump over the top.

Wrong:

BUSTED: Four GOP senators caught running ads that lie about preexisting conditions

On Thursday, NBC News dissected the false claims of four Republican senators who are claiming they will protect insurance coverage for people with pre-existing conditions.Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO), for example, is running an ad that says "Cory wrote the bill to guarantee coverage to people with...

www.rawstory.com

PolitiFact - Republican pre-existing protections leave some vulnerable

PolitiFact is a fact-checking website that rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials and others on its Truth-O-Meter.

www.politifact.com

 

[Helix]

Trump deceives himself all the time

well, at least there's no real difficulty in that. it mostly requires giving himself a compliment and being the last person in the room.

 

[Greenbeard]

What is it in your DNA that supports someone else paying for your personal responsibility issues? Do you really support taking from someone else to support you?

You know I'm paying for your health care, right? I do it because your demographic is sickly and mine is not, and thus this is the only way it's going to work. The reason we use an insurance model in the first place is that it's impossible to rely on self-financing of care given the concentration of heath expenditures on a relatively small segment of the population in any given year. So we all take from each other to give to those who need it when they need it. We carry health insurance.

This is basic stuff. The mechanics of the health economics are learned a little later in life (if ever), but the basic underlying concepts here of basic decency are usually taught in kindergarten.

 

[Conservative]

You know I'm paying for your health care, right? I do it because your demographic is sickly and mine is not, and thus this is the only way it's going to work. The reason we use an insurance model in the first place is that it's impossible to rely on self-financing of care given the concentration of heath expenditures on a relatively s
mall segment of the population in any given year. So we all take from each other to give to those who need it when they need it. We carry health insurance.

This is basic stuff. The mechanics of the health economics are learned a little later in life (if ever), but the basic underlying concepts here of basic decency are usually taught in kindergarten.

You haven't come close to putting more money into Medicare than I did over 35 years, Medicare which I never used until forced into it at retirement. Are you really this poorly informed. The mechanics of personal responsibility seem to be lost in your state. You obviously are in the insurance industry which benefits from ACA and federal mandates. That partisan support is noted and shows that you have zero credibility on this issue. How much have you contributed to ACA?

 

[Greenbeard]

You haven't come close to putting more money into Medicare than I did over 35 years, Medicare which I never used until forced into it at retirement.

Medicare isn't a savings account. You paid for somebody else at a time when medical care was cheaper. I now pay for you. The circle of life, contra your hollow "personal responsibility" mantra.

You can pay lip service to supporting the GOP's push to bring back pre-existing conditions but we both know you're protected from the consequences. Which makes your position all the more abhorrent.

 

[Conservative]

Medicare isn't a savings account. You paid for somebody else at a time when medical care was cheaper. I now pay for you. The circle of life, contra your hollow "personal responsibility" mantra.

You can pay lip service to supporting the GOP's push to bring back pre-existing conditions but we both know you're protected from the consequences. Which makes your position all the more abhorrent.

No, Medicare is a health insurance policy for those of us over 65, we contribute for the life of our working career never using it until we turn 65. It is you paying lip service to the left who believes in someone else funding your personal responsibility issues.

You have no idea how much money I contributed to Medicare over my 35 years in the labor force but I do know how much money you contributed to ACA, ZERO!!

 

[Captain America]

I am not eligible for TX Medicaid, give me my contribution back from SS and Medicare and let me decide what to do with my money, a real novel concept for people from your state who depend on someone else to take care of yours. Who pays for ACA? I paid for Medicare for 35 years!!!!

Pardon me guys, for sticking my nose in your little tiff, where it does not belong. I just thought I'd offer up a tid-bit of info I found floating around out there on the interwebz. It is in relation to which states benefit the most from federal funding.

Greenbeard, your state comes in at #39. Not bad.
Conservative, your state comes in at 25. Not good. Not bad.

Since we have 50 states, we could, for general purposes, say that states 1-25 are takers and states 26-50 are givers.

So, you might want to revisit the idea that Greenbeard comes from a welfare/minded/entitlement type state because, if I read it right, (and I could have possible read it wrong) Texas depends on federal dollars a lot more than MA does. here is the link ---> Check it out. I could have read it backwards. LOL!

https://taxfoundation.org/federal-a... the states where,and Kentucky (40.9 percent).

But one thing I wholeheartedly agree with, all the money I have paid in taxes, SS, etc., anyone who thinks that, me expecting a return for all that money is a sense of entitlement, you damn straight! I am entitled to it. I earned it with the sweat of my brow. We are not talking food stamps, rental assistance, etc., here. We are talking something I bought and paid for and expect to be there when it's my turn to cash it in. ****ing politicians are like gypsies in the palace when it comes to OUR money. None of them should be trusted. I can only imagine where I would be if I invested that same amount, I have paid for my old age social security, into a personal retirement account.

 

[MTAtech]

No, Medicare is a health insurance policy for those of us over 65, we contribute for the life of our working career never using it until we turn 65. It is you paying lip service to the left who believes in someone else funding your personal responsibility issues.

You have no idea how much money I contributed to Medicare over my 35 years in the labor force but I do know how much money you contributed to ACA, ZERO!!

Medicare costs are paid from incoming Medicare taxes and premiums.

On the ACA, here’s what you need to understand. The Affordable Care Act isn’t magic — it produces losers as well as winners. But it’s not black magic either, turning everyone into a loser. What the Act does is in effect to increase the burden on fortunate people — the healthy and wealthy — to lift some burdens on the less fortunate: people with chronic illnesses or other preexisting conditions, low-income workers. I am fine with that. Greedy bastards who don't want to help the society as whole, aren't.

 

[Conservative]

Pardon me guys, for sticking my nose in your little tiff, where it does not belong. I just thought I'd offer up a tid-bit of info I found floating around out there on the interwebz. It is in relation to which states benefit the most from federal funding.

Greenbeard, your state comes in at #39. Not bad.
Conservative, your state comes in at 25. Not good. Not bad.

Since we have 50 states, we could, for general purposes, say that states 1-25 are takers and states 26-50 are givers.

So, you might want to revisit the idea that Greenbeard comes from a welfare/minded/entitlement type state because, if I read it right, (and I could have possible read it wrong) Texas depends on federal dollars a lot more than MA does. here is the link ---> Check it out. I could have read it backwards. LOL!

https://taxfoundation.org/federal-aid-reliance-rankings/#:~:text=That year, the states where,and Kentucky (40.9 percent).

But one thing I wholeheartedly agree with, all the money I have paid in taxes, SS, etc., anyone who thinks that, me expecting a return for all that money is a sense of entitlement, you damn straight! I am entitled to it. I earned it with the sweat of my brow. We are not talking food stamps, rental assistance, etc., here. We are talking something I bought and paid for and expect to be there when it's my turn to cash it in. ****ing politicians are like gypsies in the palace when it comes to OUR money. None of them should be trusted. I can only imagine where I would be if I invested that same amount, I have paid for my old age social security, into a personal retirement account.

At least an attempt at a civil response, do you know the difference between Federal Revenue and Federal mandates? Are state and local taxpayers responsible for funding Federal mandates and federal expenses? The argument you make is invalid on definition and context. California gets more money back than any other state in the country by over 100 billion dollars all to fund federal mandates, expenses, university grants and because of size of the work force pays more in federal taxes than other states. Here is a link that will help you understand that income taxes are population driven, mandates are legislative driven

http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/2017_CFFR_Report_3.pdf

Those so called takers are receiving funds from legislation creating federal expenses and payment of entitlement expenses

 

[MTAtech]

At least an attempt at a civil response, do you know the difference between Federal Revenue and Federal mandates? Are state and local taxpayers responsible for funding Federal mandates and federal expenses? The argument you make is invalid on definition and context. California gets more money back than any other state in the country by over 100 billion dollars all to fund federal mandates, expenses, university grants and because of size of the work force pays more in federal taxes than other states. Here is a link that will help you understand that income taxes are population driven, mandates are legislative driven

http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/2017_CFFR_Report_3.pdf

Those so called takers are receiving funds from legislation creating federal expenses and payment of entitlement expenses

A 2017 study by the Rockefeller Institute of Government found that traditional blue states like Connecticut ($15,643), Massachusetts ($13,582), New Jersey ($13,137), New York ($12,820), and California ($10,510), contributed significantly more in federal taxes, per citizen, than traditional red states like Mississippi ($5,740), West Virginia ($6,349), Kentucky ($6,626), and South Carolina ($6,665).
...
For some large traditional blue states, California receives only 96 cents, Massachusetts 83 cents, Connecticut 82 cents, New York 81 cents, and New Jersey 74 cents for every tax dollar they sent to Washington. The discrepancy is significant.

 

[jakiejakester]

The Supreme Court will not rule on the ACA case until this coming Spring.

There will be ample time between November 4 and the date the ACA is potentially repealed for Republicans to submit, and for Congress to pass a replacement plan.

Anyone who interprets that the new plan passed when and if the ACA is repealed will not protect pre-existing conditions did not follow Trump, Rubio, or Cruz during the 2016 primaries, and has not watched Fox or any conservative media for the past four years. And probably has no Republican friends.

Do you honestly believe that Congress will pass a new healthcare bill without one party and only one party controlling the White House and Congress and then you need 60 votes in the Senate. The odds of that? ZERO.

Your argument is pure strawman and a fantasy. You're lying to yourself (and all of us) if you believe that a new healthcare bill will be passed.

 

[MTAtech]

Do you honestly believe that Congress will pass a new healthcare bill without one party and only one party controlling the White House and Congress and then you need 60 votes in the Senate. The odds of that? ZERO.

Your argument is pure strawman and a fantasy. You're lying to yourself (and all of us) if you believe that a new healthcare bill will be passed.

Moreover, they had the chance in 2017 and the bill was an abomination.

 

[jakiejakester]

learned a long time ago about something apparently you never did, personal responsibility. I also learned that healthcare expenses are state and local and that states can and do offer services. You buy the liberal spin and have adopted the liberal ideology that someone else should fund your personal responsibility issues. Harris/Biden are exactly who you need even though we cannot afford. Selfishness really resides in the liberal world and yours.

LOL! The state you live in ranks dead last, 50th in uninsured Americans. DEAD being the key word. No wonder that Texas also has the 2nd most Covid deaths, the second most cases and ranks 43rd worst for healthcare costs. Almost every state that ranks in the bottom of most uninsured and most expensive are RED states. Your local government(s) prove again they could care less about their citizens. You live in the worst state for healthcare in America...you must love your Governor...

 

[jakiejakester]

Jakie, read the thread lol.

And watch Fox every once in a blue moon so your assumptions about Republicans are not based off biased threads and/or CNN coverage.

The Republican sponsored 2017 bill protected pre-existing conditions.

The Court would not strike down the ACA until this Spring, by which time we will have passed a replacement bill.

I’m not sure how old you are, but I feel like some of the college aged posters in this forum have no clue how bad it was under Obamacare. It was basically what pushed Trump over the top.

Why do you keep citing a failed healthcare bill from 2017 during a time of GOP majority in Congress and the WH? Was it even voted on? You're citing it is meaningless it was DOA. And if SCOTUS kills the ACA how many Americans will die due to lack or healthcare???

 

[Conservative]

LOL! The state you live in ranks dead last, 50th in uninsured Americans. DEAD being the key word. No wonder that Texas also has the 2nd most Covid deaths, the second most cases and ranks 43rd worst for healthcare costs. Almost every state that ranks in the bottom of most uninsured and most expensive are RED states. Your local government(s) prove again they could care less about their citizens. You live in the worst state for healthcare in America...you must love your Governor...

Right tell that to those moving to this state from yours due to high taxes and cost of living. You keep buying what the left tells you and watch your state become a third world country

Lived in TX for 28 years and know how clueless many people are about the state and that includes you

 

[Captain America]

At least an attempt at a civil response, do you know the difference between Federal Revenue and Federal mandates? Are state and local taxpayers responsible for funding Federal mandates and federal expenses? The argument you make is invalid on definition and context. California gets more money back than any other state in the country by over 100 billion dollars all to fund federal mandates, expenses, university grants and because of size of the work force pays more in federal taxes than other states. Here is a link that will help you understand that income taxes are population driven, mandates are legislative driven

http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/system/files/2017_CFFR_Report_3.pdf

Those so called takers are receiving funds from legislation creating federal expenses and payment of entitlement expenses

Part 1:

I understand your point and I am far from being any authority in the complexities of federal finance. So, I could be as wrong as wrong can be. I'll just throw that out there.
I can only try to relate, the best I can, to my own experiences in the world of business. So, here is pretty much how I see it.

Just to develop an analogy that might help me explain my opinion, I would imagine that federal revenue is much akin to the association funding, that I deal with in my professional life, in as much as it means monies collected through taxes, both income and payroll, corporate taxes and any other accumulations of assets that have an actual cash value. In my personal case, my association realizes revenue by assessments, interest, fees, etc. And I would hope that both governing entities are obligated to spend all revenue received on liabilities occured in support or service to the members of said association or citizens of said government.
Just the same, I looked it up. (Thank you for challenging me to do a little brain-work.)

The definition of federal revenue, accordinkz to the interwebz, :

U.S. federal tax revenue is the total tax receipts received by the federal government each year. Most of it is paid either through income taxes or payroll taxes. In fiscal year (FY) 2021, income taxes will account for 50%, payroll taxes make up 36%, and corporate taxes supply 7%.

So, I don't think I'm too far off the mark with my basic understanding what federal revenue is. Not that much different in any other business definition of revenue.

Hmmmmm.....Federal mandate?

I gotta admit. I had to look that up to get a clear definition. I mean, I know what a mandate is and I know what federal means but it sounded like a trick question. So, I Googled. LOL! Again, thanks. I am smarter for it.

Federal mandate definition:

In the United States, federal mandates are orders that induce "responsibility, action, procedure or anything else that is imposed by constitutional, administrative, executive, or judicial action" for state and local governments and/or the private sector.

So, that's stuff like making people wear seatbelts, keep factory smoke pipes from gumming up the air, trying to keep guns away from crazies and criminals, etc. I know a lot of people think we have too many mandates and know a lot of people who say we don't have enough. But that's another talk show, right?

(continued next post below)

 

[Captain America]

Part 2:

My wife and I had a relative conversation sitting on the patio. She commented that she hates it that there are laws that make her wear a seal belt and face coverings.
She said people should decide for themselves. A lot of greedy corporate types feel the same way when regulation gets in their way of the almighty dollar. Air and water quality be damned. Anyways, I said to my wife, "Honey, you have to realize. Half of the country is beneath the median IQ level. Sometimes, you just have to make people do the things they don't have the good sense to do on their own. Kind of like when we had to make the kids not stick their fork in to the electrical outlets."

You asked, "Are state and local taxpayers responsible for funding Federal mandates and federal expenses?"

Now, THAT is a good question. I could only guess. And if I were to guess, I would guess, yes. Yes they are sir. And here's the method to my madness. In my professional world, we have what we call a "hierarchy of authority." It just so happens that in the pyramid of authority hierarchy the federal government sits at the top. The state sits below it. Local county, municipal, codes, sit below that. My association authority sits on the bottom wrung below declarations and by-laws. In other words, I cannot create any rule or take any actions that would go against any ruling higher up on that pyramid of authority.

Further, in my association, once one becomes a member they both become mutually bound. Connected at the hip, so to speak. The membership votes will determine the director's. The director's will then act as they deem necessary on behalf of the association and they are given the authority to do so in the association governing documents and state statutes. The parallel I'm trying to draw, right or wrong, is that I would think that, since the federal government supersedes state, county, municipal, corporate, (everything) rules. codes or statutes, in the hierarchy of authority, and the citizens, much like the association members, elect their federal leaders. After that, we are all under their authority, like it or not. I know. It sucks don't it? But yes, according to the system we have set up in this country, I do believe we are responsible for funding federal mandates and expenses whenever Uncle Sam says we are.

And, I could be totally wrong. But I'm a dancing fool, none the less. Watch me go!

Anyways, sorry for the long read. And thank you for your time communicating to me. Much appreciated.

Captain America

 

[Conservative]

Part 2:

My wife and I had a relative conversation sitting on the patio. She commented that she hates it that there are laws that make her wear a seal belt and face coverings.
She said people should decide for themselves. A lot of greedy corporate types feel the same way when regulation gets in their way of the almighty dollar. Air and water quality be damned. Anyways, I said to my wife, "Honey, you have to realize. Half of the country is beneath the median IQ level. Sometimes, you just have to make people do the things they don't have the good sense to do on their own. Kind of like when we had to make the kids not stick their fork in to the electrical outlets."

You asked, "Are state and local taxpayers responsible for funding Federal mandates and federal expenses?"

Now, THAT is a good question. I could only guess. And if I were to guess, I would guess, yes. Yes they are sir. And here's the method to my madness. In my professional world, we have what we call a "hierarchy of authority." It just so happens that in the pyramid of authority hierarchy the federal government sits at the top. The state sits below it. Local county, municipal, codes, sit below that. My association authority sits on the bottom wrung below declarations and by-laws. In other words, I cannot create any rule or take any actions that would go against any ruling higher up on that pyramid of authority.

Further, in my association, once one becomes a member they both become mutually bound. Connected at the hip, so to speak. The membership votes will determine the director's. The director's will then act as they deem necessary on behalf of the association and they are given the authority to do so in the association governing documents and state statutes. The parallel I'm trying to draw, right or wrong, is that I would think that, since the federal government supersedes state, county, municipal, corporate, (everything) rules. codes or statutes, in the hierarchy of authority, and the citizens, much like the association members, elect their federal leaders. After that, we are all under their authority, like it or not. I know. It sucks don't it? But yes, according to the system we have set up in this country, I do believe we are responsible for funding federal mandates and expenses whenever Uncle Sam says we are.

And, I could be totally wrong. But I'm a dancing fool, none the less. Watch me go!

Anyways, sorry for the long read. And thank you for your time communicating to me. Much appreciated.

Captain America

No, you aren't wrong in private business but this is the federal gov't and budget. It is funded by various taxes creating the revenue. The taxes were created to fund certain line items in the budget. The three parts of the budget are entitlement spending funded by payroll taxes(FICA), discretionary budget funded by Federal and Corporate income taxes and excise taxes plus others. Debt service funded by the same taxes as the Discretionary budget. The Congress creates legislation funding various programs none of which are tied to the revenue, These are the dollars going back to the states, California for example has large military bases, large number of retirees, large number of grants, Contracts and all the salaries for federal employees. Do you really believe your state taxpayers should be funding these expenses?

NON-RETIREMENT BENEFITS Payments to individuals, including Medicare benefits, food assistance, unemployment insurance payments, student financial aid and other assistance payments. Medicare makes up a majority of this category.

RETIREMENT BENEFITS Payments to individuals, including Social Security retirement, survivor and disability payments; veterans’ benefits; and other federal retirement and disability payments. Social Security represents the lion’s share of this category.

GRANTS Includes funding to state and local governments for programs such as health care, transportation, education and housing, as well as funding for individuals and other non-federal entities, such as research grants. Medicaid grants to states make up about half of this category.

CONTRACTS Includes contracts for the purchase of goods and services, including military spending. Defense purchases make up a majority of this category.

SALARIES AND WAGES Includes all salaries and wages for federal employees. A majority of spending in this category is for civilians (about two-thirds)

 

[skeptic llc]

100% yes.

I'm pretty sure any literate human has more knowledge about every subject than the president of the united states. that's what happens when you elect a stupid, anti-knowledge moron.

 

[skeptic llc]

learned a long time ago about something apparently you never did, personal responsibility.

Oh, like don't run all your companies into the ground, screw over all your vendors, and then declare bankruptcy?

 

[Conservative]

Oh, like don't run all your companies into the ground, screw over all your vendors, and then declare bankruptcy?

No, like stop buying rhetoric and start doing research and getting the facts

https://www.abi.org/feed-item/examining-donald-trump’s-chapter-11-bankruptcies

In fact, it can often be said that a Chapter 11 bankruptcy is in the best interests of the business and in no way a reflection of a poorly run company. PolitiFact took a look at all four of Trump’s Chapter 11 bankruptcies and determined that they were a result of business struggles largely beyond the billionaire-turned-presidential-candidate’s control.