Political Roundtable Part XX

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

Shocking and disappointing revelation about what I thought was the Woke Bros Real News Network

[Dat2U]

Now, the second question asked was - Why are California and Michigan ((for example are on the verge of bankruptcy?

(The $20 trillion federal debt gets more attention but the $5 trillion in State debt is probably a tougher issue - they can't print money). .

And Michigan is actually trying (https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2017/06/30/illinois-california-ignore-massively-unfunded-pensions-but-pennsylvania-michigan-take-action/#379860f420f0)

The answer is:
1) Medicaid
- More people (ACA) and rising health costs
2) Unfunded pension liabilities
- Collusion between politicians and public unions
3) Prison industrial complex
- Tough on crime & war on drugs (you can just use STUPID acronym)

And stupid is what stupid does. You can look at most states and see huge problems - regardless of if they are controlled by Rs or Ds.

For example - Scott Walker attacked 1&2 but was personally responsible for the expansion of 3.

Or you can look at large cities - mostly controlled by Ds and see that they caused 1&2.

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

[I_Like_Dirt]

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Let's be honest, even allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients is going to come back on the government as well if the dealbreaker is having insurance or not. This economic idea that allowing a bunch of poor people to die, purge style, is somehow going to save money just isn't a strong one and tends to follow similar logic of those who believe that the death penalty should be cheaper.

That said, I'll step in for dckings here. He's been pretty clear about his concern with cost drivers and I'm right there with him. I'm not on the same page as him when it comes to how to tackle those cost drivers or which ones are the greatest issues, but it clearly needs to be done.

[dckingsfan]

Now, the second question asked was - Why are California and Michigan ((for example are on the verge of bankruptcy?

(The $20 trillion federal debt gets more attention but the $5 trillion in State debt is probably a tougher issue - they can't print money). .

And Michigan is actually trying (https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2017/06/30/illinois-california-ignore-massively-unfunded-pensions-but-pennsylvania-michigan-take-action/#379860f420f0)

The answer is:
1) Medicaid
- More people (ACA) and rising health costs
2) Unfunded pension liabilities
- Collusion between politicians and public unions
3) Prison industrial complex
- Tough on crime & war on drugs (you can just use STUPID acronym)

And stupid is what stupid does. You can look at most states and see huge problems - regardless of if they are controlled by Rs or Ds.

For example - Scott Walker attacked 1&2 but was personally responsible for the expansion of 3.

Or you can look at large cities - mostly controlled by Ds and see that they caused 1&2.

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Hey Dat - we had a long conversation about health insurance cost drivers. That needs to be handled quickly (and why I didn't like the ACA - it didn't handle the problem, just pushed it down the road).

And states are basically screwed unless we handle this at the federal level.

Cost drivers included but are not limited to: Physician, facility and drug costs, Litigation; New, Expensive Medical Technology; Chronic Care; Expensive technologies and procedures; Fragmented and uncoordinated care; Lack of cost consideration from patients. Fee-for-service; High administrative expenses; Unhealthy behaviors (us); End-of-life care; Provider consolidation (tax benefits and increasing reporting requirements); Litigation

Edit: (didn't see dirt's response): It is the wareelephant in the room - if we don't handle this one we are screwed. It needs to be the ongoing focus of our government - and both sides haven't even started to step-up. If you study the issue - it should be #1 on everone's list.

[Pointgod]

Read on Twitter

Shocking and disappointing revelation about what I thought was the Woke Bros Real News Network

You mean to tell me that Russian State propaganda can't be trusted? Oh no I guess it's only the Intercept as my most trusted news source.

[Dat2U]

Now, the second question asked was - Why are California and Michigan ((for example are on the verge of bankruptcy?

(The $20 trillion federal debt gets more attention but the $5 trillion in State debt is probably a tougher issue - they can't print money). .

And Michigan is actually trying (https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2017/06/30/illinois-california-ignore-massively-unfunded-pensions-but-pennsylvania-michigan-take-action/#379860f420f0)

The answer is:
1) Medicaid
- More people (ACA) and rising health costs
2) Unfunded pension liabilities
- Collusion between politicians and public unions
3) Prison industrial complex
- Tough on crime & war on drugs (you can just use STUPID acronym)

And stupid is what stupid does. You can look at most states and see huge problems - regardless of if they are controlled by Rs or Ds.

For example - Scott Walker attacked 1&2 but was personally responsible for the expansion of 3.

Or you can look at large cities - mostly controlled by Ds and see that they caused 1&2.

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Hey Dat - we had a long conversation about health insurance cost drivers. That needs to be handled quickly (and why I didn't like the ACA - it didn't handle the problem, just pushed it down the road).

And states are basically screwed unless we handle this at the federal level.

Cost drivers included but are not limited to: Physician, facility and drug costs, Litigation; New, Expensive Medical Technology; Chronic Care; Expensive technologies and procedures; Fragmented and uncoordinated care; Lack of cost consideration from patients. Fee-for-service; High administrative expenses; Unhealthy behaviors (us); End-of-life care; Provider consolidation (tax benefits and increasing reporting requirements); Litigation

Edit: (didn't see dirt's response): It is the wareelephant in the room - if we don't handle this one we are screwed. It needs to be the ongoing focus of our government - and both sides haven't even started to step-up. If you study the issue - it should be #1 on everone's list.

So basically new gov't legislation??? I think that's wishful thinking. Too many folks getting rich off the way things are now. Maybe once the S**t eventually hits the fan, that will be the wake up call.

[TGW]

Read on Twitter

Shocking and disappointing revelation about what I thought was the Woke Bros Real News Network

You mean to tell me that Russian State propaganda can't be trusted? Oh no I guess it's only the Intercept as my most trusted news source.

MSNBC and CNN is the best guys....my bad. You guys are right. I need more HuffPo in my life!

Thank you guys for setting on me on the right path.

[stilldropin20]

Now, the second question asked was - Why are California and Michigan ((for example are on the verge of bankruptcy?

(The $20 trillion federal debt gets more attention but the $5 trillion in State debt is probably a tougher issue - they can't print money). .

And Michigan is actually trying (https://www.forbes.com/sites/patrickgleason/2017/06/30/illinois-california-ignore-massively-unfunded-pensions-but-pennsylvania-michigan-take-action/#379860f420f0)

The answer is:
1) Medicaid
- More people (ACA) and rising health costs
2) Unfunded pension liabilities
- Collusion between politicians and public unions
3) Prison industrial complex
- Tough on crime & war on drugs (you can just use STUPID acronym)

And stupid is what stupid does. You can look at most states and see huge problems - regardless of if they are controlled by Rs or Ds.

For example - Scott Walker attacked 1&2 but was personally responsible for the expansion of 3.

Or you can look at large cities - mostly controlled by Ds and see that they caused 1&2.

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Hey Dat - we had a long conversation about health insurance cost drivers. That needs to be handled quickly (and why I didn't like the ACA - it didn't handle the problem, just pushed it down the road).

And states are basically screwed unless we handle this at the federal level.

Cost drivers included but are not limited to: Physician, facility and drug costs, Litigation; New, Expensive Medical Technology; Chronic Care; Expensive technologies and procedures; Fragmented and uncoordinated care; Lack of cost consideration from patients. Fee-for-service; High administrative expenses; Unhealthy behaviors (us); End-of-life care; Provider consolidation (tax benefits and increasing reporting requirements); Litigation

Edit: (didn't see dirt's response): It is the wareelephant in the room - if we don't handle this one we are screwed. It needs to be the ongoing focus of our government - and both sides haven't even started to step-up. If you study the issue - it should be #1 on everone's list.

the solution is quite simple.

1. old people(50 and older) have all the money in this country. regardless of race or class. this is who holds the lion's share of money.

2. We allow the old to pass down this money when they die to their young without adequate taxation.

3. We do not go successfully enough "go after" their money while the old person is alive and receiving all the costly medical care. Instead we insure this person as well as allow them to put their money in trusts or quit claim their real estate to their children so as to bypass any kind of taxation. The old person pretends to be poor. Or the old person actually is poor. and yet receives medical care that they do not pay for.

meanwhile, the old person runs up 100-200K in medical expense in the last 5-10 years of life and passes on 200-500K in wealth to their children prior to those expenses and the kids get to "keep the wealth." Why??? If the old person wants to stay alive and their children want to keep them alive, make them pay for it?? and if the old person has no wealth??? i still say make the children pay for it.

The goal is to make americans understand that there will be bills to pay when you age. save now instead of buying a new car and going on multiple vacaitons. Work now. Get a 2nd job now if necessary. Save for a rainy day.

a short 3 generations ago, americans used to save for those rainy days or accept their fate at the end. Why has this changed??

[stilldropin20]

Read on Twitter

Trump:
LGBT group rescinds award for MSNBC’s Joy Reid
Romney forced into GOP primary for Utah Senate nomination
Democrats losing support of millennials: poll
WATCH: Lieu says if Trump keeps Pruitt, it will help Dems
White House expects Pruitt to answer ethical concerns
Democrats losing support of millennials: poll
WATCH: Lieu says if Trump keeps Pruitt, it will help Dems
White House expects Pruitt to answer ethical concerns
Democrats losing support of millennials: poll
TheHill.com
Autoplay: On | Off

Democrats are losing support among the millennial bloc of voters, according to a new Reuters–Ipsos poll published Monday.

The survey found that 46 percent of respondents said they would vote for the Democratic candidate over the Republican in their congressional district. That number is down 9 points from 55 percent who said they would back a Democrat in a survey taken during the same time frame in 2016.

Twenty-eight percent of respondents in the poll published Monday said they would vote for the Republican, which was up 1 point from 2016.

Reuters noted that support for Democrats is particularly fading among white voters in the 18-34 age bracket.

While 47 percent of white millennials said they would vote for the Democratic candidate in 2016, only 39 percent said they would back the Democrat this year. That number was equaled by those who said they would support the GOP candidate.

Results of the survey come as both parties prepare for the midterm elections in November. Republicans are hoping to defend the party’s majority in both the House and the Senate.

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

Shocking and disappointing revelation about what I thought was the Woke Bros Real News Network

You mean to tell me that Russian State propaganda can't be trusted? Oh no I guess it's only the Intercept as my most trusted news source.

I get all my news from Kurt Eichenwald's Twitter feed. Only source I trust.

[stilldropin20]

Monte has this one right - although it is more based upon urban living vs. rural living. The per capita spending is listed here - you can click on the revenue per capita column and see that is the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state

And here where you can see the state dependencies on federal spending:

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

impossible. I call bull-effing-shxt!

if ss/medicare/medicaid etc. are 75% of the annual budget according to lindsey graham this morning

then the oldest and most populated states with the most old people and /or un/under insured people are eating up the lion's share of that federal budget. Specifically Ca, Ny. Those states cost the most. Period. Fact.

if young children are born and going to college in the most populated states and taking student loans and getting pelll grants there then those states cost the most.

if the military spends each dollar of "protection" on each US citizen equally, then the most populated states are soaking up th elkion's share of defense costs.

and this analogy continues for nearly every "cost" built into our federal budget.

If the less populated states have lower state tax rates, that means they require less money from the individual to meet the demands of their budget.

Bottom line, the big liberal states(NY, CA, IL, Mi, Mn) might bring in more money (per capita??). Maybe. Again, I need to see numbers. But the cost much more meet the annual budget demands. Thats why they are in financial trouble. and thats why they are taxed at significantly higher rates.

Illinois for example has a lot of old people. But for the most part we have been decent at managing those costs within our state medicare programs which DO NOT give out that much benefits. thats a big reason why our state taxes are so low. and with chicago we do a decent job of attracting health young people to work and bring in tax dollars.

[Dat2U]

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Hey Dat - we had a long conversation about health insurance cost drivers. That needs to be handled quickly (and why I didn't like the ACA - it didn't handle the problem, just pushed it down the road).

And states are basically screwed unless we handle this at the federal level.

Cost drivers included but are not limited to: Physician, facility and drug costs, Litigation; New, Expensive Medical Technology; Chronic Care; Expensive technologies and procedures; Fragmented and uncoordinated care; Lack of cost consideration from patients. Fee-for-service; High administrative expenses; Unhealthy behaviors (us); End-of-life care; Provider consolidation (tax benefits and increasing reporting requirements); Litigation

Edit: (didn't see dirt's response): It is the wareelephant in the room - if we don't handle this one we are screwed. It needs to be the ongoing focus of our government - and both sides haven't even started to step-up. If you study the issue - it should be #1 on everone's list.

the solution is quite simple.

1. old people(50 and older) have all the money in this country. regardless of race or class. this is who holds the lion's share of money.

2. We allow the old to pass down this money when they die to their young without adequate taxation.

3. We do not go successfully enough "go after" their money while the old person is alive and receiving all the costly medical care. Instead we insure this person as well as allow them to put their money in trusts or quit claim their real estate to their children so as to bypass any kind of taxation. The old person pretends to be poor. Or the old person actually is poor. and yet receives medical care that they do not pay for.

meanwhile, the old person runs up 100-200K in medical expense in the last 5-10 years of life and passes on 200-500K in wealth to their children prior to those expenses and the kids get to "keep the wealth." Why??? If the old person wants to stay alive and their children want to keep them alive, make them pay for it?? and if the old person has no wealth??? i still say make the children pay for it.

The goal is to make americans understand that there will be bills to pay when you age. save now instead of buying a new car and going on multiple vacaitons. Work now. Get a 2nd job now if necessary. Save for a rainy day.

a short 3 generations ago, americans used to save for those rainy days or accept their fate at the end. Why has this changed??

Wow, and you wonder why no one takes you seriously.

[Dat2U]

In SD20's words, its time old people to fork over the cash for their own healthcare or die trying!

[Pointgod]

I told y'all a while ago. SD20 has qualities of a sociopath.

[TGW]

Make America Great Again = Letting old people die in the streets homeless. That's not an exaggeration...before social safety nets, that's what used to happen. It was quite often too.

[montestewart]

I told y'all a while ago. SD20 has qualities of a sociopath.

I like how he seamlessly segues from "fact" to "if" and "maybe" as if "if" and "maybe" equal "fact," not to mention offering as fact things he clearly pulled out of his pants pocket. States with the highest percentage of uninsured, seniors, people on Medicare, all skew toward Republican states. You have to go to Medicaid to find something close to a 50-50 split. Then there's the whole "those states cost more" entirely ignoring the original fact that they also pay more to the Federal government than they receive in return from the Federal government.

Everything, EVERYTHING, clearly shows that the money coming from these rich liberal states is subsidizing the misinformed right wing fanaticism that STD and Ted Nugent (Wang Dang Sweet Draft Dodger) keep trolling for or foolishly believe due to the trolling of others. When all the facts are against you and all the facts are easily available, just ask to see the facts. Show me the facts. I don't believe the facts. These are the facts. Those are fake facts. STD don't care about no facts. It's not about facts. Playin the game. STD's a playa.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=20

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[dckingsfan]

So what do you do about 1? Because unless were gonna pass legislation allowing hospitals to turn away sick/dying patients w/o insurance the cost is going to come back to the gov't one way or another.

Hey Dat - we had a long conversation about health insurance cost drivers. That needs to be handled quickly (and why I didn't like the ACA - it didn't handle the problem, just pushed it down the road).

And states are basically screwed unless we handle this at the federal level.

Cost drivers included but are not limited to: Physician, facility and drug costs, Litigation; New, Expensive Medical Technology; Chronic Care; Expensive technologies and procedures; Fragmented and uncoordinated care; Lack of cost consideration from patients. Fee-for-service; High administrative expenses; Unhealthy behaviors (us); End-of-life care; Provider consolidation (tax benefits and increasing reporting requirements); Litigation

Edit: (didn't see dirt's response): It is the wareelephant in the room - if we don't handle this one we are screwed. It needs to be the ongoing focus of our government - and both sides haven't even started to step-up. If you study the issue - it should be #1 on everone's list.

the solution is quite simple.

1. old people(50 and older) have all the money in this country. regardless of race or class. this is who holds the lion's share of money.

2. We allow the old to pass down this money when they die to their young without adequate taxation.

3. We do not go successfully enough "go after" their money while the old person is alive and receiving all the costly medical care. Instead we insure this person as well as allow them to put their money in trusts or quit claim their real estate to their children so as to bypass any kind of taxation. The old person pretends to be poor. Or the old person actually is poor. and yet receives medical care that they do not pay for.

meanwhile, the old person runs up 100-200K in medical expense in the last 5-10 years of life and passes on 200-500K in wealth to their children prior to those expenses and the kids get to "keep the wealth." Why??? If the old person wants to stay alive and their children want to keep them alive, make them pay for it?? and if the old person has no wealth??? i still say make the children pay for it.

The goal is to make americans understand that there will be bills to pay when you age. save now instead of buying a new car and going on multiple vacaitons. Work now. Get a 2nd job now if necessary. Save for a rainy day.

a short 3 generations ago, americans used to save for those rainy days or accept their fate at the end. Why has this changed??

Hey SD, this is quite wordy, quite long and quite wrong. It doesn't take on but one cost driver. And even then, barely. An equally bad solution would be to cut the wages of dentists and doctors.

[dckingsfan]

Monte has this one right - although it is more based upon urban living vs. rural living. The per capita spending is listed here - you can click on the revenue per capita column and see that is the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state

And here where you can see the state dependencies on federal spending:

https://wallethub.com/edu/states-most-least-dependent-on-the-federal-government/2700/

impossible. I call bull-effing-shxt!

if ss/medicare/medicaid etc. are 75% of the annual budget according to lindsey graham this morning

I think Lindsey Graham was confused (although 50% is close to 75%). And since SS has been holding steady, he should have concentrated on Medicare/Medicaid. And he should have been concentrating on how those two programs are squeezing all other spending.

Since your argument follows from the above (bolded) statement - here is the figure:

[dckingsfan]

But all of this comes back to two very weak parties that don't want to do the right things...