Trump, Doctors and Taxes.

[pgg]

"Corre, Donito! Corre!"

That reminds me of the movie "Born in East LA"

“Cigarettes, cigars, green cards ...”

“Si senor”

“Ok you are now Fernando Valenzuela, you had 21 wins last year ...”

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[facted]

Again, you are childlike, naive, and punitive in your thinking if you honestly can't differentiate between an act that is illegal and one that's immoral. You need to be a sociopath to believe justice is being done by deporting an undocumented lady who's been here 20 years, pays taxes, has no criminal record, and whose entire family including native born children live here.

My "ammo" is backing up what I say with facts and evidence. The vast majority of your posts are unsubstantiated rhetoric ripped from breitbart headlines. I asked for evidence before and I'll ask again- what supports your claim that citizens are willing to do these jobs? Because to me, it appears that research based on census data indicates that natives and undocumented even with similarly low education levels stratify into different job markets. Of note, misc. agriculture worker doesn't even make the top 10 for natives.

Immigrant and native workers compete for different low-skilled jobs



And here's an article from this March about the farming situation in California:
-----------------
Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don't want the job
"
....
But the commute is paying off. A year ago, the 31-year-old from Mexico was earning $14.75 an hour doing the same work for a different Napa company. He joined Silverado in April and now he’s making $19.50 working vineyards that produce grapes for a winery whose bottles go for about $300.

“Everything in Napa is different. They treat you differently there, they don’t pressure you, and they respect the law,” he says. “If you work here, in Stockton, you don’t have enough money.”

According to the economic theory behind Trump’s immigration crackdown, Americans should be following Martinez’s van into the fields.

“The law of supply and demand doesn’t stop being true just because you’re talking about people,” says George Borjas, a Harvard economist and prominent foe of unfettered immigration. “[Farmers] have had an almost endless supply of low-skill workers for a long time, and now they are finding it difficult to transition to a situation where they don’t.”

Borjas believes the ones who reap the rewards of immigration are employers — not just farmers, but restaurant owners and well-to-do homeowners who hire landscapers and housekeepers. The people who suffer most are American workers, who contend with more competition for jobs and lower pay.

But Silverado, the farm labor contracting company in Napa, has never had a white, American-born person take an entry-level gig, even after the company increased hourly wages to $4 above the minimum. And Silverado is far from unique.

U.S. workers filled just 2% of a sample of farm labor vacancies advertised in 1996, according to a report published by the Labor Department’s office of inspector general. “I don’t think anybody would dispute that that’s roughly the way it is now” as well, says Philip Martin, an economist at UC Davis and one of the country’s leading experts on agriculture.

Indeed, Chalmers R. Carr III, the president of Titan Farms, a South Carolina peach giant, told lawmakers at a 2013 hearing that he advertised 2,000 job openings from 2010 through 2012. Carr said he was paying $9.39, $2 more than the state’s minimum wage at the time.

He hired 483 U.S. applicants, slightly less than a quarter of what he needed; 109 didn’t show up on the first day. Another 321 of them quit, “the vast majority in the first two days,” Carr testified. Only 31 lasted for the entire peach season.

Borjas, the Harvard economist, says that it may just be that wages are still too low. “Believe me, if the wages were really, really high, you and I would be lining up,” Borjas says.

Or perhaps farms are just not a place where native-born Americans want to work. The job is seasonal, so laborers have to alternate between long stretches without any income and then months of 60-hour weeks. They work in extreme heat and cold, and spend all day bending over to reach vegetables or climbing up and down ladders to pluck fruit in trees.

“You don’t need a deep analysis to understand why farm work wouldn’t be attractive to young Americans,” says Martin, the agriculture expert.

If farmers upped the average wage to, say, $25 an hour, people born here might think twice. But that’s a pipe dream, many argue.

“Well before we got to $25, there would be machines out in the fields, doing pruning or harvesting, or we would lose crops,” Martin says.
-----------------

And please, don't feed me any of your bullsht crocodile tears about how you're concerned about low wages. I know it happens to fit your narrative in this particular case, but it's disingenuous when you are solely in the camp of the party that has pushed to abolish/cap the minimum wage for the last 30 years.

Stop it with your facts!!! They hurt me head!

 

[Precedexed Out]

Again, you are childlike, naive, and punitive in your thinking if you honestly can't differentiate between an act that is illegal and one that's immoral. You need to be a sociopath to believe justice is being done by deporting an undocumented lady who's been here 20 years, pays taxes, has no criminal record, and whose entire family including native born children live here.

My "ammo" is backing up what I say with facts and evidence. The vast majority of your posts are unsubstantiated rhetoric ripped from breitbart headlines. I asked for evidence before and I'll ask again- what supports your claim that citizens are willing to do these jobs? Because to me, it appears that research based on census data indicates that natives and undocumented even with similarly low education levels stratify into different job markets. Of note, misc. agriculture worker doesn't even make the top 10 for natives.

Immigrant and native workers compete for different low-skilled jobs



And here's an article from this March about the farming situation in California:
-----------------
Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don't want the job
"
....
But the commute is paying off. A year ago, the 31-year-old from Mexico was earning $14.75 an hour doing the same work for a different Napa company. He joined Silverado in April and now he’s making $19.50 working vineyards that produce grapes for a winery whose bottles go for about $300.

“Everything in Napa is different. They treat you differently there, they don’t pressure you, and they respect the law,” he says. “If you work here, in Stockton, you don’t have enough money.”

According to the economic theory behind Trump’s immigration crackdown, Americans should be following Martinez’s van into the fields.

“The law of supply and demand doesn’t stop being true just because you’re talking about people,” says George Borjas, a Harvard economist and prominent foe of unfettered immigration. “[Farmers] have had an almost endless supply of low-skill workers for a long time, and now they are finding it difficult to transition to a situation where they don’t.”

Borjas believes the ones who reap the rewards of immigration are employers — not just farmers, but restaurant owners and well-to-do homeowners who hire landscapers and housekeepers. The people who suffer most are American workers, who contend with more competition for jobs and lower pay.

But Silverado, the farm labor contracting company in Napa, has never had a white, American-born person take an entry-level gig, even after the company increased hourly wages to $4 above the minimum. And Silverado is far from unique.

U.S. workers filled just 2% of a sample of farm labor vacancies advertised in 1996, according to a report published by the Labor Department’s office of inspector general. “I don’t think anybody would dispute that that’s roughly the way it is now” as well, says Philip Martin, an economist at UC Davis and one of the country’s leading experts on agriculture.

Indeed, Chalmers R. Carr III, the president of Titan Farms, a South Carolina peach giant, told lawmakers at a 2013 hearing that he advertised 2,000 job openings from 2010 through 2012. Carr said he was paying $9.39, $2 more than the state’s minimum wage at the time.

He hired 483 U.S. applicants, slightly less than a quarter of what he needed; 109 didn’t show up on the first day. Another 321 of them quit, “the vast majority in the first two days,” Carr testified. Only 31 lasted for the entire peach season.

Borjas, the Harvard economist, says that it may just be that wages are still too low. “Believe me, if the wages were really, really high, you and I would be lining up,” Borjas says.

Or perhaps farms are just not a place where native-born Americans want to work. The job is seasonal, so laborers have to alternate between long stretches without any income and then months of 60-hour weeks. They work in extreme heat and cold, and spend all day bending over to reach vegetables or climbing up and down ladders to pluck fruit in trees.

“You don’t need a deep analysis to understand why farm work wouldn’t be attractive to young Americans,” says Martin, the agriculture expert.

If farmers upped the average wage to, say, $25 an hour, people born here might think twice. But that’s a pipe dream, many argue.

“Well before we got to $25, there would be machines out in the fields, doing pruning or harvesting, or we would lose crops,” Martin says.
-----------------

And please, don't feed me any of your bullsht crocodile tears about how you're concerned about low wages. I know it happens to fit your narrative in this particular case, but it's disingenuous when you are solely in the camp of the party that has pushed to abolish/cap the minimum wage for the last 30 years.

Got it, you have no shortage of names to call me and are good at using a condescending tone towards me.

Regardless, I don't care if they have been here for two months or twenty years. It doesn't matter. They broke US law by coming here and break the law every day by being here. The person who was here illegally for twenty years broke the law every one of those days, maybe at some point they should have came up with a plan to return to their native country and return legally. Just because you broke the law for a really long time doesn't mean you are not prosecuted. If I told a police officer I speed on this road every day for the last 15 years, you can't give me a ticket now, that wouldn't be a defense. Enough with the sob story, US law is US law.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Number 4 of yours would've been my option if there was a theoretical blank slate where one could go back 50 years and create de novo immigration policy, but it's unfortunately not where we are at now. I still think we can push a hybrid 2/4 solution by creating a guest worker program that brings the undocumented out into the light, yet mandates higher wages for unskilled labor and impose heavy penalties on employers who break the law. It's intuitive that increasing low skilled wages should discourage low skilled immigration, but so far it appears that incentivizing certain types of jobs does not yet have the intended effect of attracting more native workers, but rather just creates shortages.

The world certainly wouldn't stop spinning if we couldn't buy raspberries, but I think a little deceleration would be in order if we had massive shortages in maids, nannies, janitors, cooks, and construction workers.

A simpler solution, enforce immigration law, and let the free market problems take care of itself. Allow the illegal immigrants to obtain worker permits for six months and than they must return to their native country to be allowed to return to do more work. If they don't, they risk immediate deportation if they are caught.

 

[nimbus]

A simpler solution, enforce immigration law, and let the free market problems take care of itself. Allow the illegal immigrants to obtain worker permits for six months and than they must return to their native country to be allowed to return to do more work. If they don't, they risk immediate deportation if they are caught.

Worker permits?? Or enforce the existing laws?

And what about the lawbreaking crybaby farmers? Shouldn't they go to jail for hiring illegal workers when those workers are deported?

 

[fakin' the funk]

Entirely possible. Given the high number of applicants that apply, if each program only interviewed the top applicants, many programs wouldn't fill all their spots. For example, a few months ago I spoke with one program that had eight spots, interviewed 90 applicants, and received over 600 applications. Do you believe they only invited the top 90 people that applied? This was a program most would consider mid-tier. I believe nearly all programs approach their interview with a strategy to select those likely to attend their program, at least to some extent.

However, I can see you don't waste opportunities to take cheap shots. I have received invites from two top-tier academic programs, so its not like I haven't gotten any invites from top programs. One I will probably cancel because the location isn't very desirable. The season is young, so I will still get more invites. It is clear you are too short sighted to be able to grasp all that.

Thank you for mansplaining a process you've *never even been through*

 

[timgasman]

Is this really possible?

The biggest impact might be if you receive a 1099 and operate under a corporation (LLC, S-corp, C-corp). Your corporate tax rate may be lowered from 35% to 15%. All business profit, even income earned by a physician from an S corporation, will be subject to the 15% rate.

3 Ways a Trump Presidency Could Affect Doctors Financially

Yes but most people with S corp or 1099 write off pretty much everything anyway so it is unclear if any of the savings will really be realized. On the flip end, the inability to deduct state and local taxes will hit anyone in NY or CA extremely HARD so if you have a mix of W2 and 1099 you will likely see an increase in tax burden.

 

[facted]

With Corker not on board with this (Trump twitter war plus huge deficit increase), the chances of any tax cut is quickly approaching zero.

 

[deleted171991]

I like the guest worker idea. Let people come here for the growing season. They must be registered. The will receive at least minimum wage and in turn pay taxes like citizens. At the end of the growing season they must return home. Prices may rise a little bit at least to non-artificially suppressed levels. Everyone wins.

It's called the H-2A visa and it's been in existence for at least 10-15 years. It's just that some employers prefer the illegal route (cheaper, less paperwork, less liability, easier to hire and fire etc.). They can blame the lazy American millennial worker all they want, fact is they prefer to hire illegals.

 

[Twiggidy]

It's called the H-2A visa and it's been in existence for at least 10-15 years. It's just that some employers prefer the illegal route (cheaper, less paperwork, less liability, easier to hire and fire etc.). They can blame the lazy American millennial worker all they want, fact is they prefer to hire illegals.

basically

 

[Precedexed Out]

It's called the H-2A visa and it's been in existence for at least 10-15 years. It's just that some employers prefer the illegal route (cheaper, less paperwork, less liability, easier to hire and fire etc.). They can blame the lazy American millennial worker all they want, fact is they prefer to hire illegals.

Of course they do, and the establishment doesn't seem to mind because it is cheap labor allowing the rich to get richer. It certainly doesn't help low income Americans. More works means less demand and lower wages.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Wonder when the ***** says something about the special forces killed in Niger? He’s a yuge patriot so kinda weird.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Wonder when the ***** says something about the special forces killed in Niger? He’s a yuge patriot so kinda weird.

Must be painful for you to wake up every day and watch Trump dismantling the failed left wing policies from Obama. I hope you can keep it together.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I find it crazy how liberal interviewers often find it appropriate to bring up politics. Happened to me during the beginning of the week at an interview. How do we go from asking about one of my hobbies, then randomly make a comment about Trump. I answered by stating I'm not here to talk about politics, hope it doesn't hurt me, but I was being honest. Really goes to show the distorted view of reality that exists in the ivory towers. I have never had a conservative interviewer make political statements. Insane how these liberal crazies think most of the country thinks like them. I got news, they don't.

 

[deleted171991]

I find it crazy how liberal interviewers often find it appropriate to bring up politics. Happened to me during the beginning of the week at an interview. How do we go from asking about one of my hobbies, then randomly make a comment about Trump. I answered by stating I'm not here to talk about politics, hope it doesn't hurt me, but I was being honest. Really goes to show the distorted view of reality that exists in the ivory towers. I have never had a conservative interviewer make political statements. Insane how these liberal crazies think most of the country thinks like them. I got news, they don't.

Really? I don't see you talking about anything else.

It's pretty much garbage out, which makes me wonder if it's garbage in, or it's just the central processing unit.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Really? I don't see you talking about anything else.

It's pretty much garbage out, which makes me wonder if it's garbage in, or it's just the central processing unit.

You think the interview is supposed to be about politics or that it is appropriate?

I won't answer or comment on politics because of people like you and other intolerant liberals on here. People like you would automatically score my interview and overall application lower for my political beliefs alone, regardless of how competitive my application is. Doesn't the left preach tolerance? And yet the far left radicals like you are the most intolerant group.

It just goes to show the massive disconnect from far left liberals and the majority of the country.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

You think the interview is supposed to be about politics or that it is appropriate?

I won't answer or comment on politics because of people like you and other intolerant liberals on here. People like you would automatically score my interview and overall application lower for my political beliefs alone, regardless of how competitive my application is. Doesn't the left preach tolerance? And yet the far left radicals like you are the most intolerant group.

It just goes to show the massive disconnect from far left liberals and the majority of the country.

Watch out! The liberals are out to get you!

 

[deleted171991]

You think the interview is supposed to be about politics or that it is appropriate?

I won't answer or comment on politics because of people like you and other intolerant liberals on here. People like you would automatically score my interview and overall application lower for my political beliefs alone, regardless of how competitive my application is. Doesn't the left preach tolerance? And yet the far left radicals like you are the most intolerant group.

It just goes to show the massive disconnect from far left liberals and the majority of the country.

You are literally obsessed with politics, conspiracy theories, all the good stuff. So you not talking about politics is just unimaginable. Plus you literally prove how shallow you are, when you call me a leftist, especially a radical one. I'm neither. I'm a moderate centrist who hates extremists on both sides, and I tend to lean towards the more reasonable side. My favorite newsperson is actually a guy from Fox News. You wouldn't know him, because he's way too normal.

Stop watching Hannity and listening to brainwash radio hosts. Find somebody reasonable, balanced, normal, even bipartisan. A profound thinker, not a populist demagogue.

I am glad the interviewers are picking up on what a nutjob you are. Btw, speaking about disconnect, the majority of voters voted for Clinton on Election Day.

 

[GravelRider]

You think the interview is supposed to be about politics or that it is appropriate?

I won't answer or comment on politics because of people like you and other intolerant liberals on here. People like you would automatically score my interview and overall application lower for my political beliefs alone, regardless of how competitive my application is. Doesn't the left preach tolerance? And yet the far left radicals like you are the most intolerant group.

It just goes to show the massive disconnect from far left liberals and the majority of the country.

If blaming the weenie liberals doesn't work, you can always blame affirmative action. Nice little social cushion for you.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Watch out! The liberals are out to get you!

Watch out, the Russians are out to get us. Somewhere the evidence is there, somewhere....haha says CNN who pushed this delusional collusion story. Entirely fake news. Right on par with NBC trying to bury the Weinstein story.

 

[Precedexed Out]

You are literally obsessed with politics, conspiracy theories, all the good stuff. So you not talking about politics is just unimaginable. Plus you literally prove how shallow you are, when you call me a leftist, especially a radical one. I'm neither. I'm a moderate centrist who hates extremists on both sides, and I tend to lean towards the more reasonable side. My favorite newsperson is actually a guy from Fox News. You wouldn't know him, because he's way too normal.

Stop watching Hannity and listening to brainwash radio hosts. Find somebody reasonable, balanced, normal, even bipartisan. A profound thinker, not a populist demagogue.

I am glad the interviewers are picking up on what a nutjob you are. Btw, speaking about disconnect, the majority of voters voted for Clinton on Election Day.

If we had a system where total votes determined the winner. Trump most likely would won. Can't change the goal posts after the game to get the result you want.

You are not a centrist. You are a liberal posing as a centrist. I have seen plenty of the stuff you spew and it isn't centrist. You have a distorted view of what centrist really means.

Neil Cavuto or Bret Baier or Shepard Smith

My interviews have all went very well. Thank you. If you interviewed me, you would never guess I was the user of this account. At my most recent interview, I was told I would be a "great fit for our program" by the PD.

 

[Precedexed Out]

If blaming the weenie liberals doesn't work, you can always blame affirmative action. Nice little social cushion for you.

Ahhh, affirmative action, you mean legalized discrimination.

 

[PainDrain]

If we had a system where total votes determined the winner. Trump most likely would won. Can't change the goal posts after the game to get the result you want.

Did you really mean to say this? Because you realize this isn't even close to reality right? I hope this is a typo. You meant "wouldn't have won" correct?

 

[deleted171991]

Did you really mean to say this? Because you realize this isn't even close to reality right? I hope this is a typo. You meant "wouldn't have won" correct?

You forgot all the illegals who voted, and all the Democrats who voted multiple times and/or in neighboring states. This nation is just full of criminals. There were "millions" of illegal votes.

It's the damn liberals. The same people who edited the broadcast from the inauguration ceremony to make it look as if there were 3 times fewer people present, and then lied to the American people. It's a yuge conspiracy.

You just can't convince these people, PainDrain. It's a cult, by all measures. Like communism or fascism, or any other authoritarian -isms, so well engineered for small brain people. There is a reason all those systems begin by physically eradicating every single thinking human being, so they are left with the sheep.

 

[hankbb02]

You think the interview is supposed to be about politics or that it is appropriate?

I won't answer or comment on politics because of people like you and other intolerant liberals on here. People like you would automatically score my interview and overall application lower for my political beliefs alone, regardless of how competitive my application is. Doesn't the left preach tolerance? And yet the far left radicals like you are the most intolerant group.

It just goes to show the massive disconnect from far left liberals and the majority of the country.

I wouldn't bring up your beliefs to anyone, period. Your judgement is so poor I wouldn't let you in the same room with me and a patient.

 

[nimbus]

I wouldn't bring up your beliefs to anyone, period. Your judgement is so poor I wouldn't let you in the same room with me and a patient.

Yes his judgement is on par with our dear leader Trump.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Did you really mean to say this? Because you realize this isn't even close to reality right? I hope this is a typo. You meant "wouldn't have won" correct?

Let me try to be more clear. He would have won popular vote. He didn't campaign to win the popular vote because that isn't the way to win an election.

 

[Precedexed Out]

You forgot all the illegals who voted, and all the Democrats who voted multiple times and/or in neighboring states. This nation is just full of criminals. There were "millions" of illegal votes.

It's the damn liberals. The same people who edited the broadcast from the inauguration ceremony to make it look as if there were 3 times fewer people present, and then lied to the American people. It's a yuge conspiracy.

You just can't convince these people, PainDrain. It's a cult, by all measures. Like communism or fascism, or any other authoritarian -isms, so well engineered for small brain people. There is a reason all those systems begin by physically eradicating every single thinking human being, so they are left with the sheep.

And you call yourself a centrist? Entirely not true. Again, my views aren't a minority. That must make it hard for you to sleep at night.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Yes his judgement is on par with our dear leader Trump.

I'll take that as a compliment. Thank you. The judgement Trump utilized to win the election was amazing. He took down the chosen one, remember Hillary who lost. She was chosen, clearly based on the DNC doing everything they could to prevent Bernie from winning. That is a fact, something you liberals don't like to acknowledge.

 

[PainDrain]

Let me try to be more clear. He would have won popular vote. He didn't campaign to win the popular vote because that isn't the way to win an election.

Haha. You are insane. He lost the popular vote by 3 million votes. He had no chance to win the popular vote and only won the election because of an archaic electoral college system. You really have to suspend reality to believe what you just wrote.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I wouldn't bring up your beliefs to anyone, period. Your judgement is so poor I wouldn't let you in the same room with me and a patient.

The political perspective one holds doesn't equate to their clinical judgement. I think what you are really saying is that you are a shallow person who can't tolerate those who think differently than you. Without doubt, there are far left wingers who are excellent anesthesiologists. The same can be said for many conservative anesthesiologists.

It is too bad you can't see that because the neurons in your brain aren't firing correctly.

 

[pgg]

Btw, speaking about disconnect, the majority of voters voted for Clinton on Election Day.

This is both untrue and irrelevant.

I don’t agree with a lot of what Precedexed Out writes, but he’s correct here.

Voter turnout was under 60%, and Clinton had slightly more votes than Trump. At most, about 1/3 of eligible voters cast a vote for her.

But more importantly, if the presidency was determined by popular vote, then both candidates would’ve campaigned differently. It is impossible to know how the popular vote would’ve turned out if they had spent more time in NYC and Los Angeles and less time in Wisconsin.

I suspect the game would’ve favored Clinton if the popular vote was the rule, but we just don’t know.

The narrative that the election results represent a thwarting if the will of the people is wrong.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Haha. You are insane. He lost the popular vote by 3 million votes. He had no chance to win the popular vote and only won the election because of an archaic electoral college system. You really have to suspend reality to believe what you just wrote.

Is this the same reality that didn't give Trump any chance to win? And then he did. Get over yourself. He didn't spend any time in some of the most populated areas of the country because he knew they would go liberal. He could easily make up three million votes. Look at the results Trump got where Hillary was so confident she would win that she didn't bother campaigning. Cough cough....Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin

 

[Precedexed Out]

This is both untrue and irrelevant.

I don’t agree with a lot of what Precedexed Out writes, but he’s correct here.

Voter turnout was under 60%, and Clinton had slightly more votes than Trump. At most, about 1/3 of eligible voters cast a vote for her.

But more importantly, if the presidency was determined by popular vote, then both candidates would’ve campaigned differently. It is impossible to know how the popular vote would’ve turned out if they had spent more time in NYC and Los Angeles and less time in Wisconsin.

I suspect the game would’ve favored Clinton if the popular vote was the rule, but we just don’t know.

The narrative that the election results represent a thwarting if the will of the people is wrong.

I'm appreciate the bold comment. Not many on here have the integrity to make that statement.

 

[PainDrain]

Is this the same reality that didn't give Trump any chance to win? And then he did. Get over yourself. He didn't spend any time in some of the most populated areas of the country because he knew they would go liberal. He could easily make up three million votes. Look at the results Trump got where Hillary was so confident she would win that she didn't bother campaigning. Cough cough....Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin

He won those states by extremely thin margins. Are you saying he would have somehow pulled three million votes from the same liberal bastions you say he ignored? See your reasoning there. You say "He didn't campaign in populated areas because he knew they would go liberal" then in the same breath say "he would have made up 3 million votes had he campaigned there".

 

[Precedexed Out]

He won those states by extremely thin margins. Are you saying he would have somehow pulled three million votes from the same liberal bastions you say he ignored? See your reasoning there. You say "He didn't campaign in populated areas because he knew they would go liberal" then in the same breath say "he would have made up 3 million votes had he campaigned there".

Yes, he played the game to win. He needed 270 or more electoral votes. He didn't care about popular vote.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Obamacare deductibles on the rise for 2017, along with monthly premiums

This article says everything about the failure called Obamacare. "Families enrolled in bronze plans will have average deductibles of $12,393."

Over $12,000 for a family after paying 4-5-600 or more premiums each month. That isn't practical for low income families.

It is clear that Obamacare was designed to benefit the insurance companies. Record profits for health insurance companies in combination with increasing premiums in the context of a law designed to force Americans to buy their product. A real winner for health insurance companies. A real loser for taxpayers and those who need to buy usable insurance.

Profits are booming at health insurance companies

Anyone who denies the ACA wasn't of tremendous benefit for the healthcare industry is in denial....aka @FFP. Noticed @FFP posted something and then deleted it quickly. Guess @FFP doesn't want to discuss, easier to ignore, especially when clearly wrong. Somehow the fatal flaw was not having a higher penalty??? You can't be serious. The fatal flaw is the plans suck and offer no practical benefit to consumers.

For example, I'll pay amount x on health insurance premiums with a deductible of y to reduce the risk of not being able to afford my medical bills. I won't pay 10x with a deductible of 15y because it isn't practical based on my income of 35x. It really isn't as difficult as you try to make it seem when considering why people aren't buying these garbage plans, but you would rather ignore facts and the reality of the circumstances of low income America.

Crazy how no one has anything to say about this post. I guess stating the obvious causes too much distress.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

He won those states by extremely thin margins. Are you saying he would have somehow pulled three million votes from the same liberal bastions you say he ignored? See your reasoning there. You say "He didn't campaign in populated areas because he knew they would go liberal" then in the same breath say "he would have made up 3 million votes had he campaigned there".

Agree, not sure where their argument lies with this one.

Are we now counting hypothetical voters? If so, I know a bunch of people who would have voted for Clinton but didn’t because they live in heavily blue states.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

Yes, he played the game to win. He needed 270 or more electoral votes. He didn't care about popular vote.

I don’t get what the big issue is. He won the electoral votes but lost the popular vote. He won despite not “winning.”

I still think this is a terrible way to design an election process.

 

[deleted171991]

This is both untrue and irrelevant.

I don’t agree with a lot of what Precedexed Out writes, but he’s correct here.

Voter turnout was under 60%, and Clinton had slightly more votes than Trump. At most, about 1/3 of eligible voters cast a vote for her.

I swear I knew you would get caught up in this, that's why I really tried to write in the most PC way. For example, I used voters (as in people who went out to vote) not Americans. Also, the voter turnout clearly favored Trump. That's why his national approval rate (which also includes people who did not bother to vote last time) is abysmal.

But more importantly, if the presidency was determined by popular vote, then both candidates would’ve campaigned differently. It is impossible to know how the popular vote would’ve turned out if they had spent more time in NYC and Los Angeles and less time in Wisconsin.

Listen, it's almost one year later. I couldn't care less about coulda, shoulda, woulda. We live in dystopia, it's our reality. All I wanted to point out was that is not the so-called "liberals" who have the disconnect, it's trumpists who believe almost everybody else in this country thinks like them. Half of the population doesn't. Even in the reddest states I would guess one quarter of the population.

I suspect the game would’ve favored Clinton if the popular vote was the rule, but we just don’t know.

The narrative that the election results represent a thwarting if the will of the people is wrong.

See above.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I don’t get what the big issue is. He won the electoral votes but lost the popular vote. He won despite not “winning.”

I still think this is a terrible way to design an election process.

He won the election. Not really that complicated. He won and was the "winner."

 

[RadOncDoc21]

He won the election. Not really that complicated. He won and was the "winner."

And she won the popular vote, hence more people chose her, that’s not complicated either.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I swear I knew you would get caught up in this, that's why I really tried to write in the most PC way. For example, I used voters (as in people who went out to vote) not Americans.

Listen, it's almost one year later. I couldn't care less about coulda, shoulda, woulda. We live in dystopia, it's our reality. All I wanted to point out was that is not the so-called "liberals" who have the disconnect, it's trumpists who believe almost everybody else in this country thinks like them. Half of the population doesn't. Even in the reddest states I would guess one quarter of the population.

See above.

Liberals like you along with the liberal media marginalize and minimize people like me as being in the minority and paint us as lunatics, crazies, racists, and deplorable. The liberals have a tremendous disconnect. So disconnected from reality, they believed Trump had NO shot at winning. There is a very wide disconnect between the average US citizen and liberals like Obama, Schumer, and Pelosi.

 

[Precedexed Out]

And she won the popular vote, hence more people chose her, that’s not complicated either.

You just don't get it. Not surprising since you are still clinging to the Russian Trump collusion story because you just can't understand that America preferred Trump over Hillary. It is really that simple.

 

[Precedexed Out]

I shouldn't be surprised at the posts on here since those like @FFP believe the major flaw in the ACA was the penalty for not purchasing insurance wasn't high enough. Tremendous disconnect from the realities of the incomes of people using these plans and the premiums and deductibles. I hasn't gone unnoticed how you haven't responded to my post about this.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

You just don't get it. Not surprising since you are still clinging to the Russian Trump collusion story because you just can't understand that America preferred Trump over Hillary. It is really that simple.

Is 3 greater than 1? If so, then she got more votes.

In regards to Russia, I do believe there is going to be evidence brought forward that will show Trump was heavily involved with Russia and did illegal and unethical dealings with them. Unfortunately, I do not believe the republicans in congress will care enough to do anything about it.

 

[deleted171991]

I shouldn't be surprised at the posts on here since those like @FFP believe the major flaw in the ACA was the penalty for not purchasing insurance wasn't high enough. Tremendous disconnect from the realities of the incomes of people using these plans and the premiums and deductibles. I hasn't gone unnoticed how you haven't responded to my post about this.

Nope. You're the one who lacks knowledge of basic economics, including socialized health insurance. The easiest and best way to keep premiums low is to have a huge pool of healthy people in the system. That's why every single successful national health insurance system has compulsory insurance for every citizen; they will literally take the money out of your paycheck, like the SSA or Medicare. There is no opt-out, no penalties etc., simply no way around it.

Anything else, such as the greed of the insurance companies, is just the cream on the cake.

One more thing: at least for a second, remind yourself that some of the people you are chatting with are 15-20 years older, hence more experienced. You are not the first tweenager who thinks everybody else is stupid.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Is 3 greater than 1? If so, then she got more votes.

In regards to Russia, I do believe there is going to be evidence brought forward that will show Trump was heavily involved with Russia and did illegal and unethical dealings with them. Unfortunately, I do not believe the republicans in congress will care enough to do anything about it.

You believe there will be evidence? Is this the CNN manufactured evidence that gets proven time and time again to be false. Face it, there was no collusion between Trump and Russia. You are in the denial stage.

 

[Precedexed Out]

Nope. You're the one who lacks knowledge of basic economics, including socialized health insurance. The easiest and best way to keep premiums low is to have a huge pool of healthy people in the system. That's why every single successful national health insurance system has compulsory insurance for every citizen; they will literally take the money out of your paycheck, like the SSA or Medicare. There is no opt-out, no penalties etc., simply no way around it.

Anything else, such as the greed of the insurance companies, is just the cream on the cake.

One more thing: at least for a second, remind yourself that some of the people you are chatting with are 15-20 years older, hence more experienced. You are not the first tweenager who thinks everybody else is stupid.

Most people in our country aren't for government mandating we purchase anything, including health insurance. No thanks, that isn't government's place. Again, you are not a centrist.

How do you know how old I am or how much experience I have? Oh wait, you don't. Irrelevant anyway. I have plenty of life experiences outside of school including a non-medical related career. Nice attempt at creating your own argument to belittle me. Clearly shows you can't discuss the points I raised above.

Let me try to explain it more clearly. People aren't going to pay 10-25% of their annual income on health insurance premiums that has a deductible that is 15-33% of their annual income before the plan starts paying anything. I know you think every citizen needs government to hold their hand through life, but this isn't the case.

Simply put, this law benefits insurance companies only. It creates an environment forcing consumers to utilize a service that is unnecessarily increasing the cost to consumers every year while making record profits. Clearly, the everyone buying health insurance to keep costs down theory hasn't worked as is obvious based on the premiums which have dramatically increased every year. You seem to ignore those facts. After all, why would it work when you are forced to buy something. No incentive to keep prices down.

 

[RadOncDoc21]

You believe there will be evidence? Is this the CNN manufactured evidence that gets proven time and time again to be false. Face it, there was no collusion between Trump and Russia. You are in the denial stage.

I didn’t know the investigation was over, when did you find out?