Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

[howardbandy]

Today is Thursday, June 22, 2017. The Senate's proposed health care bill was announced a few hours ago.

Health care, (USNEWS, December 2, 2016) in all its aspects, makes up some 17.8% of US GDP.

The bill was drafted by a small group of Republican Senators in very private and secret meetings. No Democratic Senators participated in drafting the bill. Many Republican Senators saw it for the first time today. There has been no public discussions of the bill, nor are any planned. News and public policy organizations have begun the process of reading the bill and interpreting its effects. The Senate will vote on the bill next week, prior to leaving Washington for the July 4th holiday.

The implications are dire. This bill will greatly reduce government support for medical care, particularly to poor and elderly people. It will raise health care costs for all people. Even before the changes this bill will make, most Americans die broke or in debt, often due to costs of health care. This condition will become worse.

I have several concerns about this bill and health care in general in the US. Among them:

1. Per capita health costs in the US is at or near the highest in the world, with health quality the lowest of "developed" countries. In quality per cost, the US ranks near the absolute bottom. The US could adopt the health care policies of any of several countries and both raise care and lower cost.

2. The Trump-care bills suggest that costs will be lower due to increased competition among insurers resulting in higher quality plans at lower premiums. To date, no insurer has explained what coverage will be available, at what premium, and with what restrictions. The proponents of the bill are making promises, expecting some other organization will keep them.

3. Suggesting that every person will have "access" to health care insurance is inadequate at best. Far too many people are already living at poverty levels and receiving Medicaid or the equivalent. Medicaid currently supports health care for about 20% of all Americans. As that program is cut, as the new bill proposes, those people have no funds to buy any insurance at any price.

The leadership of the US is the poorest in my lifetime. Both elected officials, including Trump, Pence, Ryan, and McConnell, and appointed cabinet-level officials including Sessions, Zinke, Ross, Price, Carson, Chao, Perry, DeVos, Haley, and Pruitt. There are many very rich money-behind-the-scenes supporters of the current administration who have the view that it is not possible to have "too much" personal wealth and influence, including Koch, Walton, Scaife, DeVos, Friess, Adelson, Langone, Mercer, Thiel, and many others.

Without regard to political preference, it is evident that the US has a leadership crisis. What could help? Here are a few of many suggestions.

1. Stop gerrymandering -- defining strangely shaped Congressional districts.
2. Remove the Electoral College and enable popular election of the president.
3. Limit both the time and money spent on campaigns.
4. Require adequate opportunity for Congressional debate and public hearings on legislative proposals.
5. Limit the influence of lobbyists.
6. Require full disclosure for all public officials -- education, health, finances, taxes, military, etc.
7. Require that cabinet members be experts in the departments they lead.
8. Reduce focus and spending on military.
9. Increase focus and spending on health care.
10. And many more.

Thanks for listening,
Best, Howard

 

[SirRumpole]

All the best Howard, I hope Bernie is still around in the next election, I think he would romp in.

 

[Tisme]

Today is Thursday, June 22, 2017. The Senate's proposed health care bill was announced a few hours ago.

Health care, (USNEWS, December 2, 2016) in all its aspects, makes up some 17.8% of US GDP.

The bill was drafted by a small group of Republican Senators in very private and secret meetings. No Democratic Senators participated in drafting the bill. Many Republican Senators saw it for the first time today. There has been no public discussions of the bill, nor are any planned. News and public policy organizations have begun the process of reading the bill and interpreting its effects. The Senate will vote on the bill next week, prior to leaving Washington for the July 4th holiday.

The implications are dire. This bill will greatly reduce government support for medical care, particularly to poor and elderly people. It will raise health care costs for all people. Even before the changes this bill will make, most Americans die broke or in debt, often due to costs of health care. This condition will become worse.

I have several concerns about this bill and health care in general in the US. Among them:

1. Per capita health costs in the US is at or near the highest in the world, with health quality the lowest of "developed" countries. In quality per cost, the US ranks near the absolute bottom. The US could adopt the health care policies of any of several countries and both raise care and lower cost.

2. The Trump-care bills suggest that costs will be lower due to increased competition among insurers resulting in higher quality plans at lower premiums. To date, no insurer has explained what coverage will be available, at what premium, and with what restrictions. The proponents of the bill are making promises, expecting some other organization will keep them.

3. Suggesting that every person will have "access" to health care insurance is inadequate at best. Far too many people are already living at poverty levels and receiving Medicaid or the equivalent. Medicaid currently supports health care for about 20% of all Americans. As that program is cut, as the new bill proposes, those people have no funds to buy any insurance at any price.

The leadership of the US is the poorest in my lifetime. Both elected officials, including Trump, Pence, Ryan, and McConnell, and appointed cabinet-level officials including Sessions, Zinke, Ross, Price, Carson, Chao, Perry, DeVos, Haley, and Pruitt. There are many very rich money-behind-the-scenes supporters of the current administration who have the view that it is not possible to have "too much" personal wealth and influence, including Koch, Walton, Scaife, DeVos, Friess, Adelson, Langone, Mercer, Thiel, and many others.

Without regard to political preference, it is evident that the US has a leadership crisis. What could help? Here are a few of many suggestions.

1. Stop gerrymandering -- defining strangely shaped Congressional districts.
2. Remove the Electoral College and enable popular election of the president.
3. Limit both the time and money spent on campaigns.
4. Require adequate opportunity for Congressional debate and public hearings on legislative proposals.
5. Limit the influence of lobbyists.
6. Require full disclosure for all public officials -- education, health, finances, taxes, military, etc.
7. Require that cabinet members be experts in the departments they lead.
8. Reduce focus and spending on military.
9. Increase focus and spending on health care.
10. And many more.

Thanks for listening,
Best, Howard

I remember sitting on the porch of a casino in Mississippi, having a chat with some inquisitive locals and Texans. When the subject of social welfare was raised, the looks of amazement on their faces reflected the palpable intensity of interest and approval at Australia's safety nets. I made friendships with a few of them and for a while a few, especially the Texans, would include pro comments about the wonder of universal health care in emails.

Then Obama hate entered into the equation and I noticed the same people who had lauded the idea of state sponsored health care were now posting anti commentary facebook memes in line with their political instruction. It seems the USA citizen suffers the same inability to betray their brand regardless of common sense that we Australians endure.

 

[McLovin]

All the best Howard, I hope Bernie is still around in the next election, I think he would romp in.

I don't think he'd romp in. Most working class Americans don't know what's good for them and vote for neo-cons who soothe their religious sensibilities while stripping them of a living wage and health care. Wasn't that the end game of twin deficits anyway?

Most poor Americans still believe the American dream rubbish. Don't tax me; I'll be rich one day.

 

[McLovin]

I remember sitting on the porch of a casino in Mississippi

Beau Rivage? I spent a month there one night!

 

[wayneL]

I don't think he'd romp in. Most working class Americans don't know what's good for them and vote for neo-cons who soothe their religious sensibilities while stripping them of a living wage and health care. Wasn't that the end game of twin deficits anyway?

Most poor Americans still believe the American dream rubbish. Don't tax me; I'll be rich one day.

How is the pillage of the middle class, the easiest of taxation targets, good for them?

 

[SirRumpole]

How is the pillage of the middle class, the easiest of taxation targets, good for them?

What's the essential difference between being taxed for health insurance and having to pay for private insurance ?

 

[wayneL]

There is more to the Bernie ideological cesspit than health care

 

[basilio]

The Leader of The Free World, Saviour of Humanity, the ultimate Bigly One has graced the Illustrious Cover of Time Magazine.

Plain for All to See at the Wondrous Trump Golf Courses.

Trump has a fake Time Magazine cover framed on the walls of his golf clubs

By Jen Hayden
Wednesday Jun 28, 2017 · 4:52 AM AUSEST
86 Comments (86 New)
114

RSS
REBLOGGED BY

• Recommended

TAGS
Share this article

Ladies and gentlemen, Donald Trump literally has “fake news” hanging on the walls of his golf clubs. The Washington Post discovered at least four Trump-owned properties feature a framed “Time Magazine” cover featuring The Donald. The problem? They are completely phony:

This cover — dated March 1, 2009 — looks like an impressive memento from Trump’s pre-presidential career. To club members eating lunch, or golfers waiting for a pro-shop purchase, it seemed to be a signal that Trump had always been a man who mattered. Even when he was just a reality-TV star, Trump was the kind of star who got a cover story in Time.

But that wasn’t true.

The Time cover is a fake.

There was no March 1, 2009, issue of Time Magazine. And there was no issue at all in 2009 that had Trump on the cover.

Watch this video and see David Farenthold of the Washington Post break down the patently fake cover and how it might have gotten there to begin with!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...e-cover-framed-on-the-walls-of-his-golf-clubs

PS Time Magazine has told the Wanker In Chief to pull down the Fake Covers.

 

[basilio]

How I miss the good old days. When Donald Trump was just a big-noting part of the WWE entertainment industry. Just Big, Boofy, Stoopid. (Made the rasslers look like intellectual giants)

 

[howardbandy]

What's the essential difference between being taxed for health insurance and having to pay for private insurance ?

Taxes to pay for health care are assessed on income. No income, no taxes, but health care still provided through public funding of social services.
Buying insurance requires income. No income, no health care.

Health care in the US became attached to employment following WWII in joint efforts to avoid wage restrictions put in place during the war and as a benefit to attract employees. Employer-paid health care (primarily through insurance paid for by the employer) has continued since. That did not cause too much disruption during periods of employment stability and low health care inflation. Now it is a serious problem. We -- the US -- need to separate health care from employment. And to assure that health care -- services for both treatment and prevention -- is available to all people without worry about life altering expense.

The conversation about "repeal and replace" the Affordable Care Act has become insanely inhumane. Republicans control both house of representatives and senate, but have been unable to arrive at replacement legislation in either body that is satisfactory to their party. Since "replace" seems to be impossible, the plan being discussed now seems to be "repeal, but do not replace." Which will remove health care from millions of people. So much for humanity and civility.

Best, Howard

 

[qldfrog]

What's the essential difference between being taxed for health insurance and having to pay for private insurance ?

The australian govenment has not been able to answer that one so as a result:
I am taxed for health insurance AND mandated to pay for a private one.
Not that I see the US as a model; I just wonder why in the US no one seems to tackle the root of the problem: most expensive and worst healthcare system we can think of in modern societies; that just means in my opinion that far too many pigs are feeding in the trough. and obamacare or the opposite will not help .The real solution is not an easy one: going back to legal liabilities and resulting insurance premium for surgeons/hospital, closed markets for medecine, lawyers, personal responsabilities etc etc.
The same causes will end up with the same results here in Oz if we are not careful;
Thanks God we have leadership here...not

 

[basilio]

The real problem with US health care is that it just a giant rort for the various providers. The idea of helping people get well is 16 rungs below extracting the maximum commercial value for drugs, medical treatments, facilities, insurance, administration, registration . Throwing more money at the scheme will never fix it. Greed is boundless.

The danger for Oz is that we move down that path of promoting Private Health coverage over Public care. There are problems with both but letting the free market rip into Health Care will take us down the Sicko path.

 

[Junior]

The australian govenment has not been able to answer that one so as a result:
I am taxed for health insurance AND mandated to pay for a private one.

How are you mandated to pay for private healthcare?

 

[DB008]

How are you mandated to pay for private healthcare?

If you don't have private health insurance, and earn above $90,000, you pay extra. The Government is trying to funnel people into having private health. We are heading down the path of the USA system.

Medicare levy surcharge​

The Medicare levy surcharge (MLS) is levied on Australian taxpayers who do not have an appropriate level of private hospital insurance and who earn above a certain income.

It is designed to encourage individuals to take out private hospital cover, and where possible, to use the private hospital system to reduce demand on the public Medicare system.

The MLS is payable in addition to the Medicare levy.

We use a special definition of income (called income for MLS purposes) to determine whether you are liable to pay the MLS, and the rate you will have to pay. This is different to your taxable income.

The base income threshold (under which you are not liable to pay the MLS) is $90,000 for singles and $180,000 for families. However, you do not have to pay the MLS if your family income exceeds the threshold but your own income for MLS purposes was $21,655 or less.

If you do have to pay the MLS, it will be included with the Medicare levy and shown as one amount on your notice of assessment called Medicare levy and surcharge.

https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/medicare-levy/medicare-levy-surcharge/

https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals/...ds-and-rates-for-the-medicare-levy-surcharge/​

 

[McLovin]

The Medicare levy is not a hypothecated tax. It just goes straight into general revenue. It also doesn't come anywhere near close enough to paying for Medicare. The Medicare levy surcharge is just a higher tax marginal tax rate on higher incomes and should be viewed in that way, not as an extra contribution to Medicare.

You're right about the governmet wanting to punt people into private insurance. They want to defray as much of the baby boomer health costs as possible. Unfortunately, young people are starting to leave PHI because of the soaring costs with little or no benefits.

 

[Junior]

Yes, I know what MLS is, and it isn't private healthcare.....it's additional tax levied on high income earners to try and encourage them to purchase private health insurance.

Basic cover is less than $100/month, not out of reach if you are earning a good wage.

 

[qldfrog]

Yes, I know what MLS is, and it isn't private healthcare.....it's additional tax levied on high income earners to try and encourage them to purchase private health insurance.

Basic cover is less than $100/month, not out of reach if you are earning a good wage.

basic cover covers nothing Junior and if sh*t happens you will either pay from your pocket or join the line in the public system;
But your private heath cover it is true might provide you with a discount for your Nikes or yoga club;
I has to do both : apy and do some of public hospital emergency stay when hit by a serious but not critical problem [while covered by a gold extra top of the range cover....]

 

[luutzu]

Today is Thursday, June 22, 2017. The Senate's proposed health care bill was announced a few hours ago.

Health care, (USNEWS, December 2, 2016) in all its aspects, makes up some 17.8% of US GDP.

The bill was drafted by a small group of Republican Senators in very private and secret meetings. No Democratic Senators participated in drafting the bill. Many Republican Senators saw it for the first time today. There has been no public discussions of the bill, nor are any planned. News and public policy organizations have begun the process of reading the bill and interpreting its effects. The Senate will vote on the bill next week, prior to leaving Washington for the July 4th holiday.

The implications are dire. This bill will greatly reduce government support for medical care, particularly to poor and elderly people. It will raise health care costs for all people. Even before the changes this bill will make, most Americans die broke or in debt, often due to costs of health care. This condition will become worse.

I have several concerns about this bill and health care in general in the US. Among them:

1. Per capita health costs in the US is at or near the highest in the world, with health quality the lowest of "developed" countries. In quality per cost, the US ranks near the absolute bottom. The US could adopt the health care policies of any of several countries and both raise care and lower cost.

2. The Trump-care bills suggest that costs will be lower due to increased competition among insurers resulting in higher quality plans at lower premiums. To date, no insurer has explained what coverage will be available, at what premium, and with what restrictions. The proponents of the bill are making promises, expecting some other organization will keep them.

3. Suggesting that every person will have "access" to health care insurance is inadequate at best. Far too many people are already living at poverty levels and receiving Medicaid or the equivalent. Medicaid currently supports health care for about 20% of all Americans. As that program is cut, as the new bill proposes, those people have no funds to buy any insurance at any price.

The leadership of the US is the poorest in my lifetime. Both elected officials, including Trump, Pence, Ryan, and McConnell, and appointed cabinet-level officials including Sessions, Zinke, Ross, Price, Carson, Chao, Perry, DeVos, Haley, and Pruitt. There are many very rich money-behind-the-scenes supporters of the current administration who have the view that it is not possible to have "too much" personal wealth and influence, including Koch, Walton, Scaife, DeVos, Friess, Adelson, Langone, Mercer, Thiel, and many others.

Without regard to political preference, it is evident that the US has a leadership crisis. What could help? Here are a few of many suggestions.

1. Stop gerrymandering -- defining strangely shaped Congressional districts.
2. Remove the Electoral College and enable popular election of the president.
3. Limit both the time and money spent on campaigns.
4. Require adequate opportunity for Congressional debate and public hearings on legislative proposals.
5. Limit the influence of lobbyists.
6. Require full disclosure for all public officials -- education, health, finances, taxes, military, etc.
7. Require that cabinet members be experts in the departments they lead.
8. Reduce focus and spending on military.
9. Increase focus and spending on health care.
10. And many more.

Thanks for listening,
Best, Howard

The independent Congressional Budget Office [?] estimate that this Trumpcare bill will kill an estimate 22,000 American a year, each year for the first ten... then it really kick into gear.

It's unbelievable that a "democracy" would not pass law for a living minimum wage. Forcing people to work two to three jobs just to make ends meet. Then if/when they get sick, practically tells them to go get stuffed and die elsewhere.

The Democrats are no better though. Maybe slightly better in that they kill less people.

 

[Tisme]

I'm guessing those who still live under a rock incase facebook/twitter fell on them: you haven't seen this: