Current or modern politics in the United States - Page 384

**DTravel** · January 25th, 2020, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beemerider500

Well... it's nice to see that something is getting done.

Be even nicer if
1) they were actually getting done; and
2) they were things we actually wanted done.

**beemerider500** · January 25th, 2020, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DTravel

Be even nicer if
1) they were actually getting done; and
2) they were things we actually wanted done.

You can't always get what you want.

**TheBare** · January 26th, 2020, 01:32 AM

Arturo2nd

Now that's the way to debate the issues.
Though I may not agree with some of what you say and you have your own spin on things I thank you for laying out your beliefs in a rational concise manner without attacking those with different views.

**diamelsx** · January 26th, 2020, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beemerider500

You can't always get what you want.

when is the last time they got what they wanted? Every time they get into power they go to the other side to see what is acceptable to do.

**dill99** · January 27th, 2020, 10:38 PM

It is of paramount importance to require the Democratic nominee for 2020 (whoever that might be) to provide an authentic sense of immediacy and resolve within their policy itinerary to effectively deal with this very real and devastating condition that currently ravages the lower middle-class and poverty line portions of our American citizenry.

#Sanders2020
#NotMeUs
#WolfPAC2020

Among Poorest 20 Percent Of Americans, One-Third Of Income Goes To Health Care: Study

Via SALON
January 27, 2020 11:00PM
Nicole Karlis reporting
Article link here- https://www.salon.com/2020/01/27/amo...th-care-study/

In 2017, Americans spent an average of $10,209 per capita on health care, more than any developed nation. That figure is perhaps unsurprising given the patchwork, largely privatized system in place in the United States. And while a per capita figure like $10,209 sounds high, it is an overall average, meaning it says nothing of how that money is distributed between people of different means. Now, a new study putting this in context reveals that the American health care system is even more horrifically classist than we knew.

The new study from the RAND corporation, a nonprofit global policy think tank, found that healthcare payments account for a far greater proportional share of income for low-income households than high-income households. The study was published in the journal Health Services Research. The RAND researchers found that U.S. households in the bottom fifth of income cohorts pay an average of 33.9 percent of their income toward health care. Families in the highest income group pay 16 percent of their income toward health care. For households in the middle, between 19.8 percent and 23.3 percent of their income goes toward health care, according to the study.

The analysis took into account all payments made by households to pay for health care, such as taxes and employer contributions.

"Our findings suggest that health care payments in the United States are even more regressive than suggested by earlier research," Katherine G. Carman, lead author of the study and a senior economist at the RAND Corporation, said in a media statement. "As national discussions continue about health reform and health equity, it's important to understand how the current healthcare system distributes costs and payments."

The study also looked at the burden of health care payments for people who are in nursing homes. Researchers found that the burden is also greater on low-income people who need long-term care. This is because people spend most of their savings in order to qualify for public benefits.

"We think this is a particularly important addition because those in nursing homes are among the most vulnerable in terms not only of their health, but also of the large financial burden that they face," Carman said.

The study concluded that those with Medicaid get the most value for their health care spending, in part because they are generally in the lower-income bracket and have poorer health. The researchers also said that households in the highest income group are paying more into the system than the health care services they receive.

"Understanding how different groups contribute to and benefit from health care spending is difficult for researchers, policymakers and the general public," Carman said. "This work provides better insight into how the American health care system redistributes contributions and spending across different parts of society."

This study is the latest research to put into perspective the unequal system. Certainly, those with lower incomes are more likely to struggle with health insurance costs, but lower-income households are more likely to have bad health. As a separate study recently found, wealthier Americans have a better quality of life at the end of their life.

According to a recent Gallup Poll, more Americans are opting to delay medical treatments because of the anticipated cost.

"A record 25% of Americans say they or a family member put off treatment for a serious medical condition in the past year because of the cost, up from 19% a year ago and the highest in Gallup's trend," the polling outfit said in a press release. "Another 8% said they or a family member put off treatment for a less serious condition, bringing the total percentage of households delaying care due to costs to 33%, tying the high from 2014."

**charliels531** · January 27th, 2020, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dill99

"A record 25% of Americans say they or a family member put off treatment for a serious medical condition in the past year because of the cost, up from 19% a year ago and the highest in Gallup's trend," the polling outfit said in a press release. "Another 8% said they or a family member put off treatment for a less serious condition, bringing the total percentage of households delaying care due to costs to 33%, tying the high from 2014."

But the billionaires are doing just fine.

A good part of that increase comes from Trump's sabotage of the Affordable Care Act. Anyone who expected anything different from Trump was a fool.

The most immediate thing to do is to get rid of the saboteur.

**scoundrel** · January 27th, 2020, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliels531

But the billionaires are doing just fine.

A good part of that increase comes from Trump's sabotage of the Affordable Care Act. Anyone who expected anything different from Trump was a fool.

The most immediate thing to do is to get rid of the saboteur.

You shouldn't forget that he had help from the US Senate. Getting rid of Mitch McConnell and quite a few others would also be a step in the right direction. But really, unless Americans decide to abolish their privatised system and replace it with state healthcare, either at state level or at federal level, Americans will continue to spend more per head than any other country and will continue to receive less in return than any other developed country. Hundreds of CEOs of private healthcare profiteer companies, including Mitt Romney at Bain Capital, will continue to fatten on the suffering of their "customers".

**charliels531** · January 28th, 2020, 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dill99

With their thoroughly irresponsible decision to endorse both Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren as the Democratic nominee for President of the United States The New York Times has purposely and remorselessly stoked the already raging inferno of divisiveness that is ravaging the Democratic party. And this entire apparatus was constructed exclusively for the purposes of stuffing the NYT's ad rev coffers.

Speaking as a former contributor to this "newspaper" (late 1990s), I can tell you that nowadays their primary concern above all is the daily construction of an immediately consumable infotainment based product designed solely to maximize the accumulation of cash. An authentic, objective presentation of facts along with responsibly constructed op/ed is no longer to be found anywhere within the now margin to margin infotainment only environment of this newsdesk's editorial mandate. Disgusting.

I rarely pay attention to candidate endorsements and I hadn't paid attention to this one until I read your post. Interestingly, I note that the editorial noted that their rejection of Sen. Sanders as "over-promising, rigid, and divisive" was likely to anger his followers. From your post it looks as though they did accurately read your mind.

Actually the editorial is interesting. As the paper pointed out, the editorial board has no connection to the news department. The unusual thing about the dual endorsement is its duality, which they explain. Warren and Klobuchar are really the poles of the field, and each happens to be the most articulate proponent of their particular faction.

From your post it is clear that the endorsement angered you. I am sorry for that. After more than fifty years of working in and running campaigns I am painfully aware of the futility of anger. If I feel it coming on, I grab my candidate and walk a couple precincts. It does wonders for the soul.

**dill99** · January 28th, 2020, 12:44 PM

Israel's Netanyahu Indicted In Corruption Cases, Hours Before Mideast Peace Plan Announced

BREAKING via CNN (7:55AM EST)
Oren Liebermann and Amir Tal reporting
Article link here- https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/middl...ntl/index.html

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was formally indicted on corruption charges Tuesday, just hours before he was set to meet President Donald Trump for the unveiling of the US administration's long-anticipated Middle East plan.

Netanyahu has been charged with bribery and fraud and breach of trust in three separate corruption cases. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit submitted the indictment in Jerusalem District Court on Tuesday shortly after Netanyahu withdrew his request for parliamentary immunity, a request he was almost certain to lose.

Netanyahu has insisted he is innocent, calling the investigations an "attempted coup" driven by the left and the media.

The charges in court mean that Netanyahu will be the first sitting prime minister to face trial in the country's history. A trial date has not been set yet, but the legal process could possibly take years.

Under Israeli law, Netanyahu does not have to resign upon indictment. Instead, he only has to resign if he is convicted and that conviction is upheld through the appeals process.

The Knesset was due to start debating Tuesday whether to convene the committee tasked with weighing the immunity request. Lawmakers appeared certain to reject his bid, a factor likely to have influenced Netanyahu's decision not to proceed.

The Trump administration's plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be released with Netanyahu standing next to Trump, in a powerful image for Israel's embattled leader, reinforcing his claim that this is a "historic" opportunity.

"At this fateful hour for the people of Israel, while I am in the United States on a historic mission to shape the final borders of Israel and safeguard our security for generations to come, another show in the immunity-removal circus is set to begin," Netanyahu wrote on his Facebook page before his indictment.

Renewing his strategy of seeking to delegitimize the corruption cases and the investigation process, Netanyahu added: "This is the continuation of a personal and obsessive hunt against me by the 'Anyone But Bibi' people. Instead of understanding the magnitude of the hour and rising above political considerations, they continue to deal in cheap politics that endangers a crucial moment in the history of the nation."

"I will not allow my political opponents to use this matter to interfere with the historical move I'm leading," he said.

Rival Benny Gantz, whose Blue and White party emerged the largest in the Knesset after the last elections, said Netanyahu cannot lead the country and deal with his legal problems.

"Netanyahu goes to trial. We must proceed," Gantz said on Twitter. "The citizens of Israel have a clear choice -- a Prime Minister that will work for them or a Prime Minister dealing with himself. No one can run a country and at the same time run three severe criminal cases on bribery, fraud and breach of trust."

Political Deadlock

The charges against Netanyahu, which relate to three separate corruption cases, were unveiled in November.

Prosecutors say that in the most serious case, known as Case 4000, Netanyahu advanced regulatory benefits worth more than 1 billion shekels (approximately $280 million) to his friend, millionaire Shaul Elovitch, who owned the Walla! News website as part of his control of the Bezeq telecommunications company.

Prosecutors say that in exchange Netanyahu, who also served at that time as Israel's Minister of Communications, received favorable news coverage on Walla! as well as influence over the choice of stories and language used.
Netanyahu has maintained his innocence throughout the ongoing criminal proceedings, calling it an "attempted coup" led by the left and the media.
Meanwhile Israel has also been gripped by political deadlock, following elections in April and September, both of which failed to result in the formation of a new government.

Voters have a third chance to decide the fate of the country in March, though opinion polls suggest little change on the previous two results.

**diamelsx** · January 28th, 2020, 01:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charliels531

Actually the editorial is interesting. As the paper pointed out, the editorial board has no connection to the news department. The unusual thing about the dual endorsement is its duality, which they explain. Warren and Klobuchar are really the poles of the field, and each happens to be the most articulate proponent of their particular faction.

The New York Times trying to constrain the Overton window as usual. The thing of it is progressives for the most part always saw Warren as being about as Progressive as she was Native American. They understood that her chumminess with Hillary and kid gloves treatment by the media made her a person not to be trusted. You could look at the demographics of her voters and tell she was not a progressive and to have the media constantly trying to label her as such is one of the reasons why progressives, along with other groups do not trust the media these days.

January 27th, 2020, 10:38 PM	#3835
dill99 Vintage Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 892 Thanks: 15,577 Thanked 10,859 Times in 888 Posts	It is of paramount importance to require the Democratic nominee for 2020 (whoever that might be) to provide an authentic sense of immediacy and resolve within their policy itinerary to effectively deal with this very real and devastating condition that currently ravages the lower middle-class and poverty line portions of our American citizenry. #Sanders2020 #NotMeUs #WolfPAC2020 Among Poorest 20 Percent Of Americans, One-Third Of Income Goes To Health Care: Study Via SALON January 27, 2020 11:00PM Nicole Karlis reporting Article link here- https://www.salon.com/2020/01/27/amo...th-care-study/ In 2017, Americans spent an average of $10,209 per capita on health care, more than any developed nation. That figure is perhaps unsurprising given the patchwork, largely privatized system in place in the United States. And while a per capita figure like $10,209 sounds high, it is an overall average, meaning it says nothing of how that money is distributed between people of different means. Now, a new study putting this in context reveals that the American health care system is even more horrifically classist than we knew. The new study from the RAND corporation, a nonprofit global policy think tank, found that healthcare payments account for a far greater proportional share of income for low-income households than high-income households. The study was published in the journal Health Services Research. The RAND researchers found that U.S. households in the bottom fifth of income cohorts pay an average of 33.9 percent of their income toward health care. Families in the highest income group pay 16 percent of their income toward health care. For households in the middle, between 19.8 percent and 23.3 percent of their income goes toward health care, according to the study. The analysis took into account all payments made by households to pay for health care, such as taxes and employer contributions. "Our findings suggest that health care payments in the United States are even more regressive than suggested by earlier research," Katherine G. Carman, lead author of the study and a senior economist at the RAND Corporation, said in a media statement. "As national discussions continue about health reform and health equity, it's important to understand how the current healthcare system distributes costs and payments." The study also looked at the burden of health care payments for people who are in nursing homes. Researchers found that the burden is also greater on low-income people who need long-term care. This is because people spend most of their savings in order to qualify for public benefits. "We think this is a particularly important addition because those in nursing homes are among the most vulnerable in terms not only of their health, but also of the large financial burden that they face," Carman said. The study concluded that those with Medicaid get the most value for their health care spending, in part because they are generally in the lower-income bracket and have poorer health. The researchers also said that households in the highest income group are paying more into the system than the health care services they receive. "Understanding how different groups contribute to and benefit from health care spending is difficult for researchers, policymakers and the general public," Carman said. "This work provides better insight into how the American health care system redistributes contributions and spending across different parts of society." This study is the latest research to put into perspective the unequal system. Certainly, those with lower incomes are more likely to struggle with health insurance costs, but lower-income households are more likely to have bad health. As a separate study recently found, wealthier Americans have a better quality of life at the end of their life. According to a recent Gallup Poll, more Americans are opting to delay medical treatments because of the anticipated cost. "A record 25% of Americans say they or a family member put off treatment for a serious medical condition in the past year because of the cost, up from 19% a year ago and the highest in Gallup's trend," the polling outfit said in a press release. "Another 8% said they or a family member put off treatment for a less serious condition, bringing the total percentage of households delaying care due to costs to 33%, tying the high from 2014." Last edited by dill99; January 27th, 2020 at 10:47 PM..

January 26th, 2020, 01:32 AM	#3833
TheBare Vintage Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Here and there Canada Posts: 4,881 Thanks: 73,564 Thanked 71,003 Times in 4,810 Posts	Arturo2nd Now that's the way to debate the issues. Though I may not agree with some of what you say and you have your own spin on things I thank you for laying out your beliefs in a rational concise manner without attacking those with different views.

January 28th, 2020, 12:44 PM	#3839
dill99 Vintage Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 892 Thanks: 15,577 Thanked 10,859 Times in 888 Posts	Israel's Netanyahu Indicted In Corruption Cases, Hours Before Mideast Peace Plan Announced BREAKING via CNN (7:55AM EST) Oren Liebermann and Amir Tal reporting Article link here- https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/28/middl...ntl/index.html Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was formally indicted on corruption charges Tuesday, just hours before he was set to meet President Donald Trump for the unveiling of the US administration's long-anticipated Middle East plan. Netanyahu has been charged with bribery and fraud and breach of trust in three separate corruption cases. Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit submitted the indictment in Jerusalem District Court on Tuesday shortly after Netanyahu withdrew his request for parliamentary immunity, a request he was almost certain to lose. Netanyahu has insisted he is innocent, calling the investigations an "attempted coup" driven by the left and the media. The charges in court mean that Netanyahu will be the first sitting prime minister to face trial in the country's history. A trial date has not been set yet, but the legal process could possibly take years. Under Israeli law, Netanyahu does not have to resign upon indictment. Instead, he only has to resign if he is convicted and that conviction is upheld through the appeals process. The Knesset was due to start debating Tuesday whether to convene the committee tasked with weighing the immunity request. Lawmakers appeared certain to reject his bid, a factor likely to have influenced Netanyahu's decision not to proceed. The Trump administration's plan to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be released with Netanyahu standing next to Trump, in a powerful image for Israel's embattled leader, reinforcing his claim that this is a "historic" opportunity. "At this fateful hour for the people of Israel, while I am in the United States on a historic mission to shape the final borders of Israel and safeguard our security for generations to come, another show in the immunity-removal circus is set to begin," Netanyahu wrote on his Facebook page before his indictment. Renewing his strategy of seeking to delegitimize the corruption cases and the investigation process, Netanyahu added: "This is the continuation of a personal and obsessive hunt against me by the 'Anyone But Bibi' people. Instead of understanding the magnitude of the hour and rising above political considerations, they continue to deal in cheap politics that endangers a crucial moment in the history of the nation." "I will not allow my political opponents to use this matter to interfere with the historical move I'm leading," he said. Rival Benny Gantz, whose Blue and White party emerged the largest in the Knesset after the last elections, said Netanyahu cannot lead the country and deal with his legal problems. "Netanyahu goes to trial. We must proceed," Gantz said on Twitter. "The citizens of Israel have a clear choice -- a Prime Minister that will work for them or a Prime Minister dealing with himself. No one can run a country and at the same time run three severe criminal cases on bribery, fraud and breach of trust." Political Deadlock The charges against Netanyahu, which relate to three separate corruption cases, were unveiled in November. Prosecutors say that in the most serious case, known as Case 4000, Netanyahu advanced regulatory benefits worth more than 1 billion shekels (approximately $280 million) to his friend, millionaire Shaul Elovitch, who owned the Walla! News website as part of his control of the Bezeq telecommunications company. Prosecutors say that in exchange Netanyahu, who also served at that time as Israel's Minister of Communications, received favorable news coverage on Walla! as well as influence over the choice of stories and language used. Netanyahu has maintained his innocence throughout the ongoing criminal proceedings, calling it an "attempted coup" led by the left and the media. Meanwhile Israel has also been gripped by political deadlock, following elections in April and September, both of which failed to result in the formation of a new government. Voters have a third chance to decide the fate of the country in March, though opinion polls suggest little change on the previous two results.