@edgarblythe,
Agree: They're all worthless. Accomplishing nothing for too many years.
What's their excuse for doing nothing? Appeal ACA?
Robert Reich
7 mins ·
Tomorrow in his first full budget Trump will propose:
1. Gutting Medicaid by more than $800 billion over the next 10 years. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated this would cut off benefits for about 10 million people.
2. Dramatic cuts in the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance), affecting millions more.
3. Cutting a whopping $193 billion from food stamps over the coming decade — more than 25 percent — by reducing eligibility and imposing additional work requirements. The program presently serves about 42 million people.
In total, the president’s first full budget will propose $1.7 trillion worth of entitlement cuts over the next decade, affecting tens of millions of needy Americans.
Much of the savings will go toward a giant tax cut for corporations and the wealthy.
Never in history has a U.S. president proposed taking so much from so many needy Americans in order to line the pockets of Americans who are wealthier than ever.
It's doubtful the budget will be accepted by Congress, but it sets a new low bar for public morality. Under Trump, patriotism no longer means we're all in it together.
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
1. Gutting Medicaid by more than $800 billion over the next 10 years. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated this would cut off benefits for about 10 million people.
That's $80,000 a person... I doubt that Reich has the math right on that. ****, if I can get $80,000 for my healthcare and all I have to do is get on Medicare?!
Quote:2. Dramatic cuts in the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and SSDI (Social Security Disability Insurance), affecting millions more.
Sure he doesn't mean a couple hundred-million?
Quote:3. Cutting a whopping $193 billion from food stamps over the coming decade — more than 25 percent — by reducing eligibility and imposing additional work requirements. The program presently serves about 42 million people.
Maybe they can get jobs now?
Quote:In total, the president’s first full budget will propose $1.7 trillion worth of entitlement cuts over the next decade, affecting tens of millions of needy Americans.
Much of the savings will go toward a giant tax cut for corporations and the wealthy.
Never in history has a U.S. president proposed taking so much from so many needy Americans in order to line the pockets of Americans who are wealthier than ever.
It's doubtful the budget will be accepted by Congress, but it sets a new low bar for public morality. Under Trump, patriotism no longer means we're all in it together.
I think this, and almost every single post by Reich has be looked at through the hate filled glasses of a true cheese-eater. He used to know stuff, I guess age has caught up with him.
@McGentrix,
$8000 per person per year across 10 years.
Or, $80,000 per person over 10 years.
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
1. Gutting Medicaid by more than $800 billion over the next 10 years. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated this would cut off benefits for about 10 million people.
That's $80,000 a person... I doubt that Reich has the math right on that. ****, if I can get $80,000 for my healthcare and all I have to do is get on Medicare?!
That was Medicaid, not Medicare. I've seen online headlines about Medicare, too, though.
@McGentrix,
I'm going to have to block you if you continue to say cheese eater.
Robert Reich
14 mins ·
What, exactly, does today’s Democratic Party stand for, other than getting rid of Trump? And who is articulating its vision?
As Amy Davidson notes, the Democratic field is in a state of unproductive entropy, in part because the Party has not resolved the divisions and the contradictions that drew younger voters, in particular, to Bernie Sanders.
The list of potential standard-bearers includes everyone from Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren, who will be in their seventies in 2020, to traditional machine politicians, like Andrew Cuomo and Terry McAuliffe, and younger senators, such as Amy Klobuchar, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy, who as yet lack the constituencies and the institutional support that they will need in order to succeed on the national level.
But the elephant in the room is the Party’s relationship to big money and the prevailing power structure of America. If any of these potential candidates are standing on a primary-debate stage in 2020, they are going to have to offer a better answer than the one Clinton gave in Flint, a year ago, when she responded to Sanders’s charge about her taking Wall Street money by saying “if you were going to be in some way distrusted or dismissed about whether you can take on Wall Street if you ever took money, President Obama took more money form Wall Street in the 2008 campaign than anybody ever had!”
Robert Reich
·
Rather than condemn foreign governments who abuse human rights, Trump praises them for it. That’s what he did last month when he called Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, an authoritarian thug who has overseen the brutal killings thousands of innocent people suspected of being drug dealers or addicts. Duterte told reporters "there are 3 million drug addicts. ... I'd be happy to slaughter them,” saying his campaign of mass killings is the only way to “finish the problem.”
The Washington Post obtained a transcript of Trump’s April 29 phone call with Duterte:
TRUMP: “I just wanted to congratulate you because I am hearing of the unbelievable job [you’re doing] on the drug problem. Many countries have the problem, we have a problem, but what a great job you are doing and I just wanted to call and tell you that.”
DUTERTE: “Thank you Mr. President. This is the scourge of my nation now and I have to do something to preserve the Filipino nation.”
TRUMP: “I … fully understand that and I think we had a previous president [Obama] who did not understand that. You are a good man … Keep up the good work. … You are doing an amazing job… I will love to have you in the Oval Office. Seriously, if you want to come over, just let us know.”
Robert Reich
·
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has just released its estimate of the financial and real-life impact of the House Republicans’ version of Trumpcare.
Highlights:
1. 23 million fewer people would be insured under Republicans' health-care plan than are insured by Obamacare now. This is barely different than the CBO's first estimate in March, which estimated that 24 million people would lose insurance over the next decade.
2. Insurance premiums would rise for the elderly and poor over the next decade by 850 percent.
3. It would reduce the deficit by $119 billion over the next decade -- enough to give a big tax cut to the wealthy.
Senate Republicans now have to decide whether to tweak the House's version or throw it in the trash. If they have a shred of integrity or concern for the nation, they'd trash this giant redistribution from the poor and sick to the healthy and wealthy.
@edgarblythe,
Oh, good, more lies, exaggerations and doomsday prophecy from a dwarf. Yay.
@McGentrix,
Er, uh - Say, are you a bot?
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Oh, good, more lies, exaggerations and doomsday prophecy from a dwarf. Yay.
Tsk tsk.
Well to be fair...
Robert Bernard Reich is an American political commentator, professor, and author. He served in the administrations of Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and was Secretary of Labor under President Bill Clinton from 1993 to 1997. Wikipedia
Born: June 24, 1946 (age 70), Scranton, PA
Height:
4′ 11″
The man's a giant, compared to some public figures I could name.
Robert Reich
14 mins ·
Let's be clear: Tump has no jobs plan, other than forcing poor and disabled people to get jobs.
Remember Trump’s promise to save jobs at Carrier? Last spring he declared to an Indianapolis crowd that he would stop the company from uprooting in search of cheaper labor. “Here’s what’s going to happen,” Trump said at his rally. “They’re going to call me, and they are going to say, ‘Mr. President, Carrier has decided to stay in Indiana. One hundred percent. It’s not like we have an 80 percent chance of keeping them or a 95 percent. 100 percent.”
After the election, Trump took credit for rescuing Carrier jobs, tweeting on Thanksgiving that he had called the company’s leadership to cut a deal. A celebratory Trump visited the factory in December and announced that, thanks to his negotiating, more than 1,100 Carrier jobs would stay in the heartland. He said those numbers could go even higher, noting that Carrier had agreed to invest roughly $16 million into updating the plant. “And by the way, that number is going to go up substantially as they expand this area, this plant,” Trump said. “The 1,100 is going to be a minimum number.”
Carrier has now informed the state of Indiana it will soon begin cutting 632 workers from an Indianapolis factory, and keep slashing until only around 800 jobs remain. It’s moving jobs to Monterrey, Mexico, where the minimum wage is $3.90, and is automating others. The only reason it's keeping any jobs in Indiana is the state is giving it $7 million in tax credits. (If the company outsources any of those remaining jobs over the next 10 years, it will have to pay back the money, according to the Indiana Economic Development Corp.)
Another Trump lie. When will America’s blue-collar workers realize Trump is shafting them?
@edgarblythe,
Trying to keep track of Trump's lies is futile. He lies so often, assuming they are all lies saves a lot of time and effort.
According to Politifact, Trump tells the truth 5% of the time.
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
When will America’s blue-collar workers realize Trump is shafting them?
5 months...Trump has not employed EVERYONE yet?!?!What is he waiting for? Everyone knows that he can just bypass Congress for things like this... I mean, no, wait, he can't.
Reich is a douche wrapped in an enema box. I honestly don't know why you follow him.
I'm out.
@edgarblythe,
24 million who lose their health insurance will probably become wise to Trumpcare, but it's a bit too late for them. They've already been duped.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/3/15531494/american-health-care-act-explained
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trumpcare-bill-affect-health-care-consumers/story?id=47203086
Also,
Quote:A 64-year-old who makes $26,500 a year could see net out-of-pocket costs increase from $1,700 a year under the current law to $14,600 a year under the GOP plan, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates. A 40-year-old making the same amount would pay a few hundred dollars more after the tax credits, from $1,700 under Obamacare to $2,400 under the GOP bill.
@cicerone imposter,
I was just reading that same thing elsewhere, Tak.
Robert Reich
6 hrs ·
The senior White House adviser under investigation in the Russia probe turns out to be Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
It’s unclear what possible crimes Kushner might be under investigation for committing, but in addition to possible coordination between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 presidential election, investigators are also looking into possible financial crimes.
It’s called corruption. Any expert on corrupt authoritarian regimes throughout history knows that those regimes' wrongdoing often runs through family members with official titles. That’s because people who want to curry favor with a regime often provide favors to family members as a way to get closer to the person in power.
Kushner has already come under scrutiny for his family possibly benefiting personally from his proximity to his leader-of-the-free-world father-in-law. His sister earlier this month mentioned Kushner's advisory role in the White House while pitching Chinese investors on a New Jersey housing development.
This is a big reason why we have anti-nepotism laws in the United States – precisely to avoid the corruption that all too often comes with installing relatives in positions of power. Trump and Kushner have disregarded those laws. They may come to regret it.
@cicerone imposter,
You and the left-wing media will continue to lie about these stats no matter what the real truth is about the stats. A majority of those people will CHOOSE not have insurance, the only reason they currently have insurance was due to the mandate. Once the mandate is lifted real choice will ensue.
Quote:Also,
Quote:
A 64-year-old who makes $26,500 a year could see net out-of-pocket costs increase from $1,700 a year under the current law to $14,600 a year under the GOP plan, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates. A 40-year-old making the same amount would pay a few hundred dollars more after the tax credits, from $1,700 under Obamacare to $2,400 under the GOP bill.
I like how you pulled the subsides from the before costs instead of giving the real cost of that insurance plan. So besides lying about the real cost, you are also not mentioning that the new plan would include real health insurance pools instead of socialist pools to "spread" the pain.
