Political Discussion

Another two concessions were made on the stimulus bill last night.

The first one particularly infuriates me.

$1.4 Billion in Public Transportation relief has been cut from rail. Though, it does look like most of the money was earmarked for infrastructure updates and expansion verses offsetting losses last year that resulted in service cuts. Both are badly needed.

The other cut was a bridge. Apparently the bill was going to fund the construction of a bridge.
 
www.cnn.com

Americans' wages have gone up, but the news is not all good

The average paycheck for American workers has gotten bigger during the pandemic. Ordinarily that would be cause to jump for joy. But the reason for this increase is grim: Millions of low-income jobs are gone, and that has pushed average pay higher.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

2020 will go down in the history as seeing wage growth. The average wage went up 5.1%

But the reality of it is most people did not see an increase. The floor fell out in 2020. Many lower paid Americans lost their jobs. These job loses are what created the average wage growth.

"Wages grew largely because more than 80% of the 9.6 million net jobs lost in 2020 were jobs held by wage earners in the bottom 25% of the wage distribution," Gould and her colleague Jori Kandra wrote in a paper in late February.
Click to expand...

1614783879485.png


The only real growth in wages were seen by millionaires and billionaires.


Edit: My father says these statistics are BS / Fake News. you had a historical low unemployment in all tracked groups in 2020, that would negate job losses. The economy was strong despite the pandemic and did very good under President Trump.

SMH
 
Last edited:
RenegadeMonster said:
Another two concessions were made on the stimulus bill last night.

The first one particularly infuriates me.

$1.4 Billion in Public Transportation relief has been cut from rail. Though, it does look like most of the money was earmarked for infrastructure updates and expansion verses offsetting losses last year that resulted in service cuts. Both are badly needed.

The other cut was a bridge. Apparently the bill was going to fund the construction of a bridge.
Click to expand...
Why do they package things like this? Why can't they vote on individual issues? I feel like a lot more would get done if they didn't try to do 75 different things in one bill. You're guaranteed to have something in there that one side or the other doesn't agree on... If we could just pass the things that most people do agree on and then let people argue over the things they don't agree on, at least some things would be getting done while they bickered.
 
Max Sterling said:
Why do they package things like this? Why can't they vote on individual issues? I feel like a lot more would get done if they didn't try to do 75 different things in one bill. You're guaranteed to have something in there that one side or the other doesn't agree on... If we could just pass the things that most people do agree on and then let people argue over the things they don't agree on, at least some things would be getting done while they bickered.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of it has to do with feeling like these bills would not pass on their own or may not be popular. They try to bundle things to give them a chance to pass as well as keep things moving. For example, a solo bill for something that many people senators don't feel is important or likely to pass may not get a vote on the floor. The senate majority leader may decide it waste too much time in debate and opposition for what it archives and there are more important issues at hand.


Public transportation is commonly part of these bundles, rarely do we ever get a standalone bill. Public transportation is usually opposed by Republicans looking to make cuts to it. It's too expensive, frivolous spending in their opinion. Another heated point would by why would they spend tax payers money on a bill that only really impacts people in the north East Corridor or California or put another way Blue States. Why should Red States tax dollars go to paying for projects in blue states. They believe it should be the other way around. That blue states fund red states. Not to mention that Republicans believe in Capitiaismn, and that public transportation should be service run by private entities and not the government. Public transportation is not profitable and requires subsidies to be affordable to those who use it. This is why you don't see the private industry take over and run it like Republicans believe should happen in a free market.

Public transportation isn't universally popular with democrats either. It's expensive and only benefits the few who live in the area of the project. Capital investment in our infrastructure has been lacking the last 40 plus years. Other developed nations spend around 30% of their GDP annually. We are no where near there.
 
Last edited:
Watching this very skeptically...

The biggest ACA-related item in the American Rescue Plan, which the House passed last week, would address one of the most persistent complaints about the law among customers and political opponents alike: sky-high premiums for people who don't qualify for federal tax credits to help pay them.

The tax credits can go a long way for those who qualify — in many cases, it's possible to find a plan with zero premiums. But everyone making more than 400 percent of the federal poverty line ($51,520 for an individual) falls off a "subsidy cliff" and has to pay full price. Premiums vary widely depending on local health care costs, and plans often are so expensive that customers forgo insurance.

For the next two years, the American Rescue Plan would expand the tax credits to higher earners and cap the maximum premium anyone is expected to pay at 8.5 percent of their income. It would boost tax credits at lower incomes, as well: People making less than 150 percent of the federal poverty line ($19,320 for an individual) would be expected to pay $0 in premiums for a benchmark plan, for example.

For those with lower incomes, the bill would boost incentives for states to expand Medicaid by having the federal government pick up the tab for new recipients. Twelvestates, including Florida, Georgia and Texas, have refused to accept Medicaid dollars through the ACA. It's unclear whether the bill would affect their calculations.

The changes, which would be temporary, closely mirror Joe Biden's health care agenda from the presidential campaign, and Democrats are expected to try to make them permanent down the line.

www.nbcnews.com

Obamacare would get a big (and quiet) overhaul in the Covid relief bill

Democrats are proposing big changes to the Affordable Care Act. Here's why the debate is less fierce this time.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

This legislation was largely given to the administration by health insurance lobbyists. They are doing everything they can to avoid a full public option for everyone. I don't see a huge amount of extra being done to make care affordable and this isn't going to do anything to change our current medical system. This is Biden going back to business as usual. Big pay offs for private insurance and it doesn't touch things like private equity in healthcare and surprise billing. How disappointing.
 
@nolalady, correct me if I'm wrong, but these tax credits are only for plans bought on the Obama Care Marketplace and not for work provided healthcare plans.

I find it crazy that you could work a low wage job that does provide healthcare, but have to pay $400 a month for that healthcare and have high deductibles that make using said healthcare impossible. This will do nothing to solve situations like that if I'm reading it correctly.
 
www.cnn.com

Pence pushes false election fraud claims in denouncing Democratic reform bill

Former Vice President Mike Pence is seizing on a Democratic-led initiative to streamline election standards to again push false claims of voting irregularities in one of his first public statements since leaving office.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Pence is peaking out for the first time since Trump left office. And he's parroting Trumps claims of widespread voter fraud. He came out with an Op Ed against the houses bill that would standardize election laws across all states.

Pence expressed concern about "the integrity of the 2020 election," citing "significant" and "troubling" voting irregularities in an op-ed for the conservative publication Daily Signal.
Click to expand...

And this is what Pence has to say about the houses bill:

Pence suggested that the bill was an "unconstitutional power grab" and would increase opportunities for election fraud, trample the First Amendment, further erode confidence in elections and dilute the votes of legally qualified eligible voters.
Click to expand...

So, are legally qualified eligible voters those that are whiter, older and wealthier? Those more likely to vote republican? And that we are diluting their vote?

I just don't see how it makes any sense that making election law the same in all 50 states and makes it easier for younger people and people of color to vote dilutes votes and tramples the First Amendment.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.cnn.com

Pence pushes false election fraud claims in denouncing Democratic reform bill

Former Vice President Mike Pence is seizing on a Democratic-led initiative to streamline election standards to again push false claims of voting irregularities in one of his first public statements since leaving office.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Pence is peaking out for the first time since Trump left office. And he's parroting Trumps claims of widespread voter fraud. He came out with an Op Ed against the houses bill that would standardize election laws across all states.



And this is what Pence has to say about the houses bill:



So, are legally qualified eligible voters those that are whiter, older and wealthier? Those more likely to vote republican? And that we are diluting their vote?

I just don't see how it makes any sense that making election law the same in all 50 states and makes it easier for younger people and people of color to vote dilutes votes and tramples the First Amendment.
Click to expand...
Clearly the GOP plan going forward is a full court press for voter disenfranchisement. Really important to get a new voting rights act passed.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
@nolalady, correct me if I'm wrong, but these tax credits are only for plans bought on the Obama Care Marketplace and not for work provided healthcare plans.

I find it crazy that you could work a low wage job that does provide healthcare, but have to pay $400 a month for that healthcare and have high deductibles that make using said healthcare impossible. This will do nothing to solve situations like that if I'm reading it correctly.
Click to expand...
No, you're right. They are pumping money into the ACA Marketplace, you know the thing we already proved doesn't help families afford health care. I'll give you a real world scenario. My friend was required to purchase his bread route and become his "own employer". The bread company owns the bread. My friend owns the truck and the distribution route that delivers the bread. He doesn't do bad, but being his own employee, the bread company is no longer on the hook for any payroll taxes or benefits for him or his family. He checked out the ACA Market place and the lowest plan he could get had a $12K deductible and would have cost them about $600/mo for the privilege to pay said high deductible.

There's been some grumbling about possibly putting out a true public option, but the insurance companies are not having any of that. We are at the point where it either cost less or just as much to pay doctors cash rather than getting insurance involved. At this point, I have to ask, why do I have insurance? If it's truly a catastrophic policy--which is what high deductible health plans are despite them being sold as an alternative to traditional HMO or PPO structures--then it needs to be priced as such. The only benefit of the HSA is that it comes out of pre-tax income, but you get tax breaks on medical expenditures post tax, so how much of a tax benefit is this really? HSA's aren't necessarily a bad idea; they just seem to be an idea that an insurance lobbyist put together to get people to buy into these crappy health plans.
 
Employers jump on the HSA bandwagon as well because it keeps their costs down.

People heading into retirement age right now are actually vary excited about these new changes. On that other forum I'm on people posted about how if past this allows them to retire now. The only thing keeping them working is healthcare because they fall off that tax credit cliff if they were to retire. These changes would allow them to retire now and the 2 year get them to where medicare can take over. Great for people who are worried about going to work these days because of COVID-19 or who lost a good job and are working just for insurance until they can retire.

But other than that age group, these changes don't seem to help at all. Healthcare plans are just getting crappier and more expensive. The health insurers are generating more revenue and sharing more costs with the consumer. All while saying don't point the finger at us. Hospitals charge to much, or Big Pharma charge to much.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
apple.news

Senate bill will narrow income eligibility for $1,400 stimulus checks — CNN Politics

President Joe Biden has agreed to a compromise with moderate Democrats to narrow the income eligibility for the next round of $1,400 stimulus checks that are included in a bill the Senate is expected to take up this week, a Democratic source told CNN Wednesday.
apple.news apple.news

Damnit
Click to expand...
Sorry, that is written very unclearly to me. Let me know if I am misunderstanding.

House // Senate

$1400 for up to $150k // $1400 up to $150k
tapers to $0 at $200k // tapers to $0 at $160k

Is that correct?
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Employers jump on the HSA bandwagon as well because it keeps their costs down.

People heading into retirement age right now are actually vary excited about these new changes. On that other forum I'm on people posted about how if past this allows them to retire now. The only thing keeping them working is healthcare because they fall off that tax credit cliff if they were to retire. These changes would allow them to retire now and the 2 year get them to where medicare can take over. Great for people who are worried about going to work these days because of COVID-19 or who lost a good job and are working just for insurance until they can retire.

But other than that age group, these changes don't seem to help at all. Healthcare plans are just getting crappier and more expensive. The health insurers are generating more revenue and sharing more costs with the consumer. All while saying don't point the finger at us. Hospitals charge to much, or Big Pharma charge to much.
Click to expand...
Well they've taken advantage of the best job market, best housing market, cheap college, and easy entry and wealth accumulation in the stock market, why not give them another break? It's not like Medicare and Social security will be more than a shell of a program by the time either of us starts drawing on it, so why not just let them deplete the trust funds and leave us holding the bags. But hey, we're the entitled brats in this scenario.

dhodo said:
Sorry, that is written very unclearly to me. Let me know if I am misunderstanding.

House // Senate

$1400 for up to $150k // $1400 up to $150k
tapers to $0 at $200k // tapers to $0 at $160k

Is that correct?
Click to expand...
That's how I read it.
 
nolalady said:
Watching this very skeptically...

The biggest ACA-related item in the American Rescue Plan, which the House passed last week, would address one of the most persistent complaints about the law among customers and political opponents alike: sky-high premiums for people who don't qualify for federal tax credits to help pay them.

The tax credits can go a long way for those who qualify — in many cases, it's possible to find a plan with zero premiums. But everyone making more than 400 percent of the federal poverty line ($51,520 for an individual) falls off a "subsidy cliff" and has to pay full price. Premiums vary widely depending on local health care costs, and plans often are so expensive that customers forgo insurance.

For the next two years, the American Rescue Plan would expand the tax credits to higher earners and cap the maximum premium anyone is expected to pay at 8.5 percent of their income. It would boost tax credits at lower incomes, as well: People making less than 150 percent of the federal poverty line ($19,320 for an individual) would be expected to pay $0 in premiums for a benchmark plan, for example.

For those with lower incomes, the bill would boost incentives for states to expand Medicaid by having the federal government pick up the tab for new recipients. Twelvestates, including Florida, Georgia and Texas, have refused to accept Medicaid dollars through the ACA. It's unclear whether the bill would affect their calculations.

The changes, which would be temporary, closely mirror Joe Biden's health care agenda from the presidential campaign, and Democrats are expected to try to make them permanent down the line.

www.nbcnews.com

Obamacare would get a big (and quiet) overhaul in the Covid relief bill

Democrats are proposing big changes to the Affordable Care Act. Here's why the debate is less fierce this time.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

This legislation was largely given to the administration by health insurance lobbyists. They are doing everything they can to avoid a full public option for everyone. I don't see a huge amount of extra being done to make care affordable and this isn't going to do anything to change our current medical system. This is Biden going back to business as usual. Big pay offs for private insurance and it doesn't touch things like private equity in healthcare and surprise billing. How disappointing.
Click to expand...
I’m one of those who fell off the subsidy cliff. I haven’t had insurance since 2016. For me to have insurance for my family would run us over $2000 and a $6k deductible to then have 50% coinsurance. So $30k+ out of pocket before insurance pays a dime.

Prior to the ACA the company I contract for was able to arrange a group plan for the independent contractors that was affordable and of reasonable coverage. The experiences of people like me are why some folks think the ACA is working exactly as planned. I do believe it was designed to be the total failure it is in order to increase support for a MFA system.
 
dhodo said:
Before it was $100k. $112.5k is where the head of household taper begins.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s absurd politically, you are gonna give a portion of the population Less than what the GOP gave out which will surely fuck over some people. If they kept the cut off the same then yes, some who don’t need the money would end up with stimulus but by restricting further you are gonna have people that were relying on those funds not receive checks which will look way worse. Also, it’s not like the money they don’t give give out is being reallocated to the needy, it will probably just be used to build some more bombs and tanks and whatnot. I guess at least it higher than they were initially pushing for.
 
Georgia house of representatives have now passed their election reform bill.

As expected, it repeals no excuse absentee ballots that has been in place since 2005. It also severely limits early voting expands poll monitoring.

Georgia republicans say this is aimed at bringing confidence back into the election system after major irregularities occurred in 2020?

Just what irregularities might those be? That Democrats won the state for the first since since 1992 I'm sure. As there is no real evidence of anything else...

This bill is expected to pass the republican control Georgia Senate and be signed by the Governor.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
Georgia republicans say this is aimed at bringing confidence back into the election system after major irregularities occurred in 2020?
Click to expand...
I could swear they said their counting was accurate with no irregularities except the the outcome wasn't to their liking...............I'm gonna refer back to @Chucktshoes now, because he's pushing a very compelling argument as of late, lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top