Jump to content

Trump's Assault On Health Care


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

This is a good point. He'd lose a ton of support if he campaigned on these issues, so they're trying to sweep it under the rug. Did you see Mike Pence's reaction when someone asked him about the law that made it easier for states to opt out of Medicaid expansion? Totally shell shocked.

 

People with disabilities need to work? Uhhh. Ok. 

 

This is where the rubber meets the road politically. It's not about Trump. It's about socioeconomic policies.

 

I don't have a problem with poor people getting some scraps to eat. The savings there are so miniscule that we may be talking about percentage points in the hundreth's as it pertains to the deficit. 

 

I always hear that people become more conservative with wisdom. I've always felt like people are conservative until some awful () happens to THEM.

 

While we're at it, why do none of the criminal justice reforms address cash bail, the biggest fraud ever perpetrated against those at the low end of the wealth spectrum. You're telling me it's cool that a person is released from jail because they have some "collateral?" Freedom is the last thing you wanna be treating like a pawn shop.

 

But again, let's see if Trump actually campaigns on these issues. Alabama, the state with THE highest rate of folks receiving such benefits, may not be so happy. 

 

I always respected Paul Ryan because he had the stones to articulate his conservative economic vision.

 

NYS just got rid of cash bail for many offenders.

It is not going well.

 

55 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Worst part of the budget would be the cuts to EPA. At least congress still has enough of a spine to block a majority of the cuts.

 

I don’t know the answer to this, and I’m not expecting you to know either, but I’ll ask it anyway: what does the Federal EPA do that a State Environmental Agency doesn’t do?  Doesn’t every state have their own EPA?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

NYS just got rid of cash bail for many offenders.

It is not going well.

 

 

How so? People not showing up to court? Crime rate? Just curious. Honestly, I don't care about the ramifications. It's unjust to hold people who have not been convicted of a crime because they don't have the cash to pay bail. People should be free to buy whatever the () they want, but they shouldn't be able to buy freedom. This ain't a pawn shop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

How so? People not showing up to court? Crime rate? Just curious. Honestly, I don't care about the ramifications. It's unjust to hold people who have not been convicted of a crime because they don't have the cash to pay bail. People should be free to buy whatever the () they want, but they shouldn't be able to buy freedom. This ain't a pawn shop.

 

When the same miscreant is arrested, freed, arrested, freed, arrested, freed within thirty-six hours, the idea that the law might just be flawed creeps across the state.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Keukasmallies said:

 

When the same miscreant is arrested, freed, arrested, freed, arrested, freed within thirty-six hours, the idea that the law might just be flawed creeps across the state.

Logic dictates that this particular miscreant is either in prison or will soon find his way there. 

 

If you think treating freedom like a pawn shop is a good idea, fair enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

How so? People not showing up to court? Crime rate? Just curious. Honestly, I don't care about the ramifications. It's unjust to hold people who have not been convicted of a crime because they don't have the cash to pay bail. People should be free to buy whatever the () they want, but they shouldn't be able to buy freedom. This ain't a pawn shop.

 

The system forever has been that if someone doesn’t have the cash then they could post property as a bond. Also, judges have had wide discretion in  releasing nonviolent offenders on their own recognisence. 

 

Honestly it’s too early to tell.  Here’s a Buffalo News article reporting crime rates up. https://buffalonews.com/2020/02/08/sifting-through-the-bail-reform-controversy-in-new-york/

 

Here’s another one says too early to tell. https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/criminal-justice/what-know-about-states-new-bail-reform-law.html

 

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tiberius said:

WHITE HOUSE

Trump hits Medicaid, food stamps in push to slash domestic spending

He will also ask Congress for a slight spending increase for the Pentagon as he releases his $4.8 trillion budget blueprint for the upcoming fiscal year.

BY CAITLIN EMMA AND JENNIFER SCHOLTES

 

 

Tax cuts for the wealthy, health care cuts for the poor 

Yeah.  He's a Republican.  

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

The system forever has been that if someone doesn’t have the cash then they could post property as a bond. Also, judges have had wide discretion in  releasing nonviolent offenders on their own recognisence. 

 

Honestly it’s too early to tell.  Here’s a Buffalo News article reporting crime rates up. https://buffalonews.com/2020/02/08/sifting-through-the-bail-reform-controversy-in-new-york/

 

Here’s another one says too early to tell. https://www.cityandstateny.com/articles/policy/criminal-justice/what-know-about-states-new-bail-reform-law.html

 

 

 

Appreciate the response. Noticed that there was an entire thread on the issue. Also re-read my recent posts and they come across as someone in "emotional" mode, so I'm gonna leave it alone for awhile and do more reading. But I will say in summation as this ties into outcomes; If outcomes dictate policy, I'm guessing taking away the scraps people get from food stamps will almost certainly increase crime and likely cost taxpayers as much, if not more, to jail petty offenders.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

Appreciate the response. Noticed that there was an entire thread on the issue. Also re-read my recent posts and they come across as someone in "emotional" mode, so I'm gonna leave it alone for awhile and do more reading. But I will say in summation as this ties into outcomes; If outcomes dictate policy, I'm guessing taking away the scraps people get from food stamps will almost certainly increase crime and likely cost taxpayers as much, if not more, to jail petty offenders.

 

I’m more of a “leave the system alone” guy. But if change works without proving the doubters right, then I’m okay with that, too.

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gary Busey said:

 

 

Worst part of the budget would be the cuts to EPA. At least congress still has enough of a spine to block a majority of the cuts.

 

He used to be my representative until re-districting.  He's a complete idiot.  So does a 25% cut mean we're changing laws?  Of course not.  Back it up Bill.  Stooge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, dubs said:


I really respect your ability to display how much of an uneducated moron you are on a day to day, hour by hour basis. It’s impressive. 

Lol, oh, do I just throw out pointless insults because I can’t articulate a valid point? Oh no, that’s actually you. 

10 hours ago, dubs said:

It’s almost like if god didn’t create government, the world would collapse into itself. 
 

 

 

 

 

or...that’s what the government wants you to believe.  
 

?

God didn’t creat the government, the people did. And yes fool, civilization actually would collapse if government didn’t do its job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tiberius said:

 

 

Honestly, I thought you guys would be cheering people would get hurt 

This is funny. 

This line right here is why you are a sad petty person. You have no facts to back you up but you will assume the literal worst about everyone who disagrees with you. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gary M said:

If 3.6 million people have been lifted off welfare, shouldn't the budget be reduced?

 

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08/03/fact-check-trump-says-3-5-million-people-have-been-lifted-off-food-stamps/

 

And if the economy stays strong more should come off? So even bigger savings.

And yet the deficit goes up and up....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Gary M said:

If 3.6 million people have been lifted off welfare, shouldn't the budget be reduced?

 

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/08/03/fact-check-trump-says-3-5-million-people-have-been-lifted-off-food-stamps/

 

And if the economy stays strong more should come off? So even bigger savings.

The Left's headline: Trump Rips Food Stamps From 3.6 Million People

 

The reality: Ever Improving Economy Boosts 3.6 Million People Off Food Stamps

 

This just goes to show that the Left needs to be dishonest to sell their ideas.

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

And yet the deficit goes up and up....

So, you want to reduce the deficit by spending more money? How do you function on a day to day basis? 

  • Haha (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

I see even you know that your response made no sense and you can't defend it so you just strike out at people. 

Nope, it's just that you are not a serious person and the truth, serious arguments, real facts etc, are wasted on you. You just really suck 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...