April 3, 2017
"Senate Democrats on Monday appeared to secure the votes necessary to filibuster the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch..."
"... sending the body hurtling toward a bitter partisan confrontation later this week," the NYT reports.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
230 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 230 of 230HSAs are not a topic I want to discuss with you, Ritmo.
We're not talking about the NHS. You're confusing your acronyms. And you don't want to discuss anything with me because as with all else, you demand that they agree to your conclusions before starting. Table tennis is less predictable.
TTR: "No wonder you're so anti-progressive. You have no trust."
Well, with no Trust, he's certainly not a Kennedy either.
@ Matthew Sablan
TTR started drinking before he started posting. Pity him.
Birkel: "@ Matthew Sablan TTR started drinking before he started posting. Pity him."
Why should I pity him?
What if he is drinking "the good stuff"?
-- Ah, so. Yes. You don't know how budgets work.
No. It's you who doesn't know how Republican politicians work. I'm just calling their bluff.
TTR: "No. It's you who doesn't know how Republican politicians work. I'm just calling their bluff."
Ha!
Like that's been a big challenge! Come on, at least make it interesting.
-- Because everything you've said shows no understanding of it.
I know that if you knew anything about the ramifications about something as simple as an HSA, you'd stop sounding like a salesman for them too defensive to discuss them while just demanding that they be bestowed with glowing paeans to their free-market awesomeness!
@ Drago
TTR is a mean drunk with a substance abuse problem. People like that deserve pity on that point, specifically.
HSAs are a way for the insurance industry to pretend that profiting through overbearing restrictions can be replaced by profiting off of a retreat from defining coverage terms and making the consumer the agent.
If people knew what they needed to spend on for care or prevention there wouldn't be doctors. It's a scam. An illusion. It might have a noble goal, but just doesn't work within the the context of the medical insurance and care market.
Now watch Matthew Sablan stutter and stammer and call me an ignoramus while neglecting to say what I got wrong (or right!) in that.
What a true believer. I believed they sounded good once, too.
TTR is a mean drunk with a substance abuse problem.
I always love it when the delicate fractals of your snowflake are extended, Birkel. It's so beautiful. Like watching a baby bird opening his wings for the first time.
Fly, Birkel. Fly!
"I know that if you knew anything about the ramifications about something as simple as an HSA, you'd stop sounding like a salesman for them too defensive to discuss them while just demanding that they be bestowed with glowing paeans to their free-market awesomeness!"
-- What ramifications? That the National Conference of State Legislators concluded that "The total amount of assets in HSA accounts to over $28 billion. Those numbers reflect the growing popularity of HSAs, which is the result of entrusting consumers to make decisions about their own health care and finances."
They aren't a silver bullet to fix anything, but they allow consumers to get control of spending and experience savings (both on their overall taxable income and by helping to lower costs for them and others on goods). Like I said, you don't really seem to understand how they work (namely, that they are NOT part of the free market, as they are restricted, generally, to taxpayers in the United States who are enrolled in a high-deductible health plan, as opposed to an actual free market that would open them to everyone.)
@ TTR
I legitimately feel sorry for you. You are pitiful.
@ Matthew Sablan
Government can do good by decreasing information asymmetries. Disclosure requirements for prices, before the provision of services, would go a long way.
"Government can do good by decreasing information asymmetries. Disclosure requirements for prices, before the provision of services, would go a long way."
-- I'm always wary of any service or good that I can't compare prices on. Looking for an apartment pisses me off because no one will just tell me the price.
Gotta get rid of the RINOs, they will be the death of our republic.
If we don't put that damn trucker naked in the coldest lake in Alaska there is no justice, and I ain't be allowing therefore none of you your damned oh-so-precious peace.
PUT HIM IN THE LAKE OF ICE OR WE ALL GO IN THE FIRE.
I ain't hit my kill quota in a while, sorry if I sound desperate.
TTR: "I always love it when the delicate fractals of your snowflake are extended,..."
You don't need to "extend" them. You just need to look a little closer....
Alex: "Gotta get rid of the RINOs, they will be the death of our republic."
The "Wait and See-ers" will get you killed every time!
(Cliff Robertson in "Midway")
The Toothless Revolutionary
Want to keep corporate money out of politics? Flatten the tax system and eliminate carve-outs and write-offs. Diminish the buying power of government, the less money the government spends and the fewer regulations they enact, the less gain corporations have in looking to get favorable tax status for themselves and government subsidies. Thus less corruption. The more centralized a government, the more corrupt it becomes, this is why Chavez's daughter is the richest person in Venezuela, and the Castro brothers are likely billionaires.
Thanks thach pham. That just about sums it all up perfectly.
To comment on the idea of measuring the proportion of government as a % of the economy - its a mugs game. This has been argued since the 19th century. It was one of those factors in, for instance, development economics models of the 1970s, that never ever worked.
The trouble is that its impossible to, for instance, come up with even comparable statistics between countries. This is because governments true sizes are not limited to their explicit budgets. They shade off into a netherworld of NGOs and Quangos, of mandates on the private sector and regulated entities, of government monopolies and licensed providers.
You can also make the private sector pay for things you dont want in your budget.
Add a mandate or two, such as for instance a carbon dioxide trading scheme, and you can use that to substitute for "alternative energy" subsidies, and for large scale examples see California. A government that can do that doesnt need to worry about budget restraints. They just have to order other people to pay for it.
And Obamacare. It was supposed to be budget neutral through a series of mandates on the public. The people were to be taxed, but not really taxed, off budget, to pay for what the UK pays for aboveboard through taxation.
I recall how the Marcos dictatorship controlled the Philippine economy, through mandating a group of industrial sector NGOs with legal authority and the ability to collect levies (not taxes, oh no), controlled by political cronies.
There are so, so many ways to be sneaky.
@TTR: I don't understand why you are so down on HSA's. The 25 M or so that you constantly fret about aren't going to use them because they expect healthcare to be free.
That was a great message in my carrier, and It's wonderful commands like mind relaxes with understand words of knowledge by information's.
Seo Company in India
Where the hell are all the cowboys to fend off these indians?
Lewis Wetzel is in the house.
Frontiersman, hunter, Indian fighter, and scholar.
These Indian fellows who are spamming this site are sons of devils!
The stars are against them! They are cows! Nickle-jaos, go back to your carriages!
"Corporations that pollute can always be counted upon to hire scientists working in the public interest, rather than the company's profits."
Kinda funny since the biggest polluter of the last year was the EPA. Quis custodiet yada yada.
And. Surprise! Corportions exist to make profits!
Who fucking knew?
TTR has a public sector job.
He can't be fired.
a bitter partisan confrontation
As opposed to a gentle, kind partisan confrontation?
1. Change Senate rules to eliminate filibuster.
2. Withdraw Gorsuch
3. Appoint and confirm Ted Cruz to SCOTUS.
And. Surprise! Corportions exist to make profits!
Surprise! Hitmen and bodyguards exist to make profits... off of the murder industry!
Rusty will now advocate the economic benefits of repealing anti-murder statutes in 3... 2...
Oh wait. That would require him to be morally consistent.
Post a Comment