ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Trump is planning to reduce government pensions.
The private sector has almost completely opted out. Are you saying you don't care about the economic well-being of your fellow Americans?
Progressive political positions are not "far left", they're in lock step with the majority of voters
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
The private sector has almost completely opted out. Are you saying you don't care about the economic well-being of your fellow Americans?
londonfog
Well-Known Member
OMG you stuck on last years news. That proposal has long been abandon. That was in 2018 tax proposal and it got fucking nowhere. He wanted to lower the amount disabled Vets get and lower the amount federal civilian workers received. Both were dead in the water. Dude you really have to stop being this low of an information voter. Reminds me too much of @schuylaar.
He also need to understand the difference between a military pension and a federal civilian pension. Two different fucking things
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Disabled vets got a significant raise last month and the VA is one of the few government agencies funded despite the shutdown. Tty would know that if he were informed by facts instead of RT.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
You have conceded the argument because you showed Tty to be uninformed.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Nonetheless, it was a proposal he wanted.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
More evidence that these aren't 'radical' policies if most Americans want them;
https://therealnews.com/stories/most-americans-want-medicare-for-all-without-private-insurers
https://therealnews.com/stories/most-americans-want-medicare-for-all-without-private-insurers
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
The Real News Network is a slight to moderate liberal bias media organization with a high level of factual reporting. Anything coming from this site can generally be trusted but may require verification due to bias.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
30% of people enrolled in Medicare for all carry supplemental insurance. A person who doesn't carry insurance can end up with thousands of dollars in out of pocket costs for a treatment of typical serious medical condition such as a stroke or heart attack.
Supplemental insurance isn't cheap. My mother carry's supplemental insurance including one for prescription drug medigap insurance and it costs her more than a thousand dollars a year. Since she's pretty healthy, she is unlikely to ever recoup the cost of insurance. Of course, the difference is the insurance company's profits.
Is this really what you want?
I think you guys haven't really thought this out. Just like your icon, Sanders.
But then again, it was just a symbolic bill.
Is "progressive" somebody who just talks and doesn't do anything? Is that what you mean by "progressive"?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
No, Republicans are the ones who are trying to drag this country backwards socially and denying science to justify no change in environmental regulations.
Democrats support change, Republicans support the status quo. Only a handful out of the hundreds of Democrats serving in Congress today oppose important liberal-progressive policies. One can point to many initiatives and policy statements by Democrats on education, the health care system, stewardship for the environment, civil rights and so on that represent liberal progressive change.
This has been going on for some time but has gotten more extreme in the Republican camp lately.
This is why it is naive to say Republicans and Democrats share equal blame for the lack of progress.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Are you talking about legal campaign donations?
So, Pelosi over her term in office, has voted 94% of the time to support progressive causes. Those legal campaign donations went to the right place. For reference, Sanders has voted 96% of the time for progressive causes. It's not that difficult to comprehend that Pelosi, who votes for progressive issues is doing the bidding of her district, which is one that votes consistently for progressive Democrats.
Unless one were an idiot.
Is this where you say you believe without supporting facts that Pelosi is not trustworthy? You said the same thing about Harris. Belief without proof is pretty much what religion is founded on. You are making a good case people describing your kind as a Cult of Sanders.
As long as we are talking, please tell me what you mean by progressive? You clearly aren't talking about somebody who supports progressive issues. So, what do you mean by "progressive" when you say it.
Last edited:
tangerinegreen555
Well-Known Member
Only 30%? I'm kind of shocked.
Everybody on medicare I know has supplemental insurance. You have to have it.
Medicare only pays 80%, it's not 'free' medical insurance. And medical costs aren't going down.
I don't think some people here get that. You pay out of pocket to go along with that medicare. It is not free to recipients.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I edited my original reply and replaced it with the following.
Looking more closely at what I read, the 30% figure is for people without Medigap.
https://www.gomedigap.com/blog/medicare-supplement-trends/
While the percentage of Medicare Supplement policyholders altogether continues to increase each year, there is a large variation in the percentage of beneficiaries with a Medigap policy in each state. In the majority of states (30 total), 20-29% of Medicare beneficiaries hold a Medicare supplement policy. However, Medigap penetration rates are as low as 3% in Hawaii and as high as 51% in Nebraska. The states with the highest Medigap penetration (above 40%) are clustered in the Plains States: Nebraska, Kansas, Wyoming, South Dakota and North Dakota.
Elsewhere, I find that 90% have some form of supplemental medicare insurance.
https://assets.aarp.org/rgcenter/health/fs149_medicare.pdf
Last edited:
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Cool2bum
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
As would be about expected.. 30% of old rich people who carry Medicare have non emergency medical procedures they wish to take care of, so they use supplemental insurance to take care of them. Where's the controversy?
Which is the entire reason for giving every American medical coverage as a right
Have you been paying attention at all the past three years?
Yes, that's really exactly what the majority of the country wants. We want everyone to be able to get access to healthcare whether or not they can afford it. We want healthcare to be available to anyone in this country who needs it, citizen or not. We don't want 45,000 Americans to die every year because they choose to avoid going to the doctor because they can't afford it. That is absolutely what we want.
Sanders and Ro Khanna in the House put pressure on Amazon and through that raised the wages of 350K Amazon workers
Why do you try to reduce that some kind of limited accomplishment?
Everything monumental Sanders or progressives actually accomplish is diminished like you've done here as if it holds no true value to the 350 thousand workers or their families or the thousands of Disney workers families before them... I mean, when these people see you saying that, that they didn't do anything to help accomplish this, that they didn't sacrifice for days/weeks.. do you think they value what you say and that that will help the Democratic party when it comes time to vote in the next election?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Just because they're legal doesn't mean they aren't corrupt.
But I understand that you fail to grasp the difference.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
He doesn't care about anything but his high falutin' principles, consequences be damned!
Sounds like a conservative to me.
Unclebaldrick
Well-Known Member
Or a Progressive!
You are a joke. And the more you don't get it the funnier and sadder it gets.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
You don't know? Bernie's bill is Medicare for all. You can fulminate and cry foul all you like. But he calls his plan Medicare for all. I described Medicare for all and it's not really "for all" if you don't have the money to cover 20% of the procedure or if you don't have the money for supplemental insurance.
Which is the entire reason I want the House and Senate to debate exactly what we want to replace the ACA with. Bernie's health care "bill" (an unfinished amateurish document) is Medicare for all. Medicare for all leaves the door open for insurance companies to jigger the system, which they do today and will do tomorrow. I'd like something better. Meanwhile, we need to shore up the ACA to get through these times when nothing more can get done wrt universal healthcare.
Regarding that Amazon crap. His job is in the Senate, where he had done nothing of substance his entire 12 years. A US Senator has the power to positively affect millions of people. He moonlights as a social activist. He trumpets his comparatively minor second job as a social activist because he is a failure as a Senator. I don't blame him. I blame you for being taken in by that.