Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

So why is there a Democratic debate at 9pm ET on a Sunday?

Because Dems don't watch them. Then they would have to face facts.

I can think of two reasons, one they want to bury it a bit, so there's no accidents that might backfire, particular when comparing it to the Republican cluster****. And two, the Democratic establishment might not like Bernie Sanders appeal, and doesn't want to give him too much of a platform vs. Clinton.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I can think of two reasons, one they want to bury it a bit, so there's no accidents that might backfire, particular when comparing it to the Republican cluster****. And two, the Democratic establishment might not like Bernie Sanders appeal, and doesn't want to give him too much of a platform vs. Clinton.

Sounds completely unfair to Bernie and unfair to Americans who deserve to see how Hilary acts with tough questions.

Pretty much, yeah.

How can people say the democratic party isn't as stupid if not more then the republicans then. Look at this jackassery, they are trying to hide their debates from us.

Originally posted by Bardock42
And two, the Democratic establishment might not like Bernie Sanders appeal, and doesn't want to give him too much of a platform vs. Clinton.
Sadly.

They should be held accountable for their shady actions.

Who is the DNC chairman?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So why is there a Democratic debate at 9pm ET on a Sunday?
Not to compete with football.

So why not during the week, are you really downplaying this?

It's pretty well known that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a pretty major Hillary supporter, so most people think that she is intentionally marginalizing the debates because they don't help Hillary, since Hillary is the front runner and the presumed nominee. Debates help those trailing, usually. The less people watching the debates the more likely it is that Hillary will maintain her lead.

It's a problem and it's really shady, which is why a lot of people have petitioned for Schultz's removal as DNC chairwoman, because she barely if at all hides her bias.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Sounds completely unfair to Bernie and unfair to Americans who deserve to see how Hilary acts with tough questions.

We already know how she acts with tough questions: she says whatever she thinks the person asking(or the audience) wants to hear. She is the living embodiment of the whole concept of women asking their husbands if they are fat and the husbands answering "no" regardless of whatever the actual truth might be. Which is a super sweet thing to do for a spouse, but for the country? Yeah, not so much.

Originally posted by Surtur
We already know how she acts with tough questions: she says whatever she thinks the person asking(or the audience) wants to hear. She is the living embodiment of the whole concept of women asking their husbands if they are fat and the husbands answering "no" regardless of whatever the actual truth might be. Why is that a "woman thing" as opposed to a "politician thing"?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So why not during the week, are you really downplaying this?
I don't know, maybe they didn't want to do it on the weekend.

I'm not downplaying anything, simply suggesting that this might not be a grand conspiracy.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
Why is that a "woman thing" as opposed to a "politician thing"?

Who said it was a woman thing? I simply used the "wife asks husband if she is fat" thing as an example.

We could switch it to "Guy asks wife if he is the best she has ever had in bed" if it makes you feel better about the genders.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I don't know, maybe they didn't want to do it on the weekend.

I'm not downplaying anything, simply suggesting that this might not be a grand conspiracy.

Sounds to me like it is a conspiracy

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Sounds to me like it is a conspiracy
It could be.

You should have noticed by now that I'm the last person to believe in conspiracies. It's not in my nature, not because I trust people, but because I don't think people are as deliberate and calculating as some give them credit for.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
It could be.

You should have noticed by now that I'm the last person to believe in conspiracies. It's not in my nature, not because I trust people, but because I don't think people are as deliberate and calculating as some give them credit for.

They are hiding the debate and screwing Bernie over, this is a form of conspiracy against him and the american people.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
They are hiding the debate and screwing Bernie over, this is a form of conspiracy against him and the american people.
Maybe. 9 ET isn't incredibly late (except for y'all on the West Coast). People who are really into politics will probably watch it anyway, and people who are already apathetic will be apathetic.

I'm not convinced Bernie could dramatically shift things with a great debate performance anyway, even if the debate got Superbowl level ratings.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I don't think people are as deliberate and calculating as some give them credit for.

This is like saying most people are decent human beings. It might be true, but it doesn't mean there aren't some crazies out there.

Never underestimate greed.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Maybe. 9 ET isn't incredibly late (except for y'all on the West Coast). People who are really into politics will probably watch it anyway, and people who are already apathetic will be apathetic.

I'm not convinced Bernie could dramatically shift things with a great debate performance anyway, even if the debate got Superbowl level ratings.

Isn't western time even earlier than eastern?

And Bernie has been doing rather well, I think he has a lot of popular appeal when people hear him.

On the other hand, the parties aren't bound to let popular vote decide their candidate, and even if he overtakes Clinton the party may choose to go with her anyways.

Originally posted by Surtur
Who said it was a woman thing? I simply used the "wife asks husband if she is fat" thing as an example.

We could switch it to "Guy asks wife if he is the best she has ever had in bed" if it makes you feel better about the genders. My point was mostly that "tell the audience what they want to hear" is standard politician-talk and no one in the election seems to be doing any different. Every candidate is pandering to a certain demographic, even Trump.

Hilary sounds like a old hag. Bernie doing so much better.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Hilary sounds like a old hag.

It's interesting how many gendered insults you use on Hillary. Especially ones that have nothing to do with her policies or stances.

Hilary is lying through her teeth, she can't stop lying

Bernie and Martin just said he's a liar!

Whats new!

This is more of a shit show then the republican debate's

Hilary takes huge donations from wallstreet, and she is trying to say he doesn't take money from wallstreet.

Goldman Sachs have given her like over half a million dollars just on speaking fee's

She just admitted she wants to make the wealthy pay for everyones child care!!!

IS SHE ****ING INSANE???

ITS RICH PEOPLES FAULT AND RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR OTHER PEOPLES KIDS!???

WHAT THE ****!!

**** HER!

Honestly don't give a shit about rich people. Really hard to feel sympathy for someone who could lose half of everything and still buy a private island.

Originally posted by Q99
It's interesting how many gendered insults you use on Hillary. Especially ones that have nothing to do with her policies or stances.

You should take a look at the comment section of places like The Federalist, Redtstate, or National Review.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Honestly don't give a shit about rich people. Really hard to feel sympathy for someone who could lose half of everything and still buy a private island.

Why the hell do they have to pay for other people child care?

Children are society's responsibility, and there are parents who are unfit to provide sufficient education or care to their children. That is not just unfair to the children, it also leads to greater problems for society down the line. It is beneficial to have well adjusted, well educated adults, and the upbringing of children is the main contributing factor of that.

Now, that means that everyone should contribute, via taxes, to ensure that all children have access to education, have enough food, and are taken care of. Rich people, who are blessed with most of the money and assets of a society should contribute their fair share to that tax pool (whether that is a progressive tax, that taxes the rich more for being able to partake more in a communities common goods, or a flat tax may be debatable, but currently, the very wealthiest do not pay their fair share due to exceptions and loop holes that their direct lobbying has created).

I assume that is basically Hillary's stance. Support children and tax the rich fairly.

If children are everyone's responsibility that means I should be allowed to slap the shit out of the little bastards when they annoy the hell out of me while in public.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
If children are everyone's responsibility that means I should be allowed to slap the shit out of the little bastards when they annoy the hell out of me while in public.

Actually, because children are everyone's responsibility, is the reason why no one is allowed to slap the shit out of them.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Children are society's responsibility, and there are parents who are unfit to provide sufficient education or care to their children. That is not just unfair to the children, it also leads to greater problems for society down the line. It is beneficial to have well adjusted, well educated adults, and the upbringing of children is the main contributing factor of that.

Now, that means that everyone should contribute, via taxes, to ensure that all children have access to education, have enough food, and are taken care of. Rich people, who are blessed with most of the money and assets of a society should contribute their fair share to that tax pool (whether that is a progressive tax, that taxes the rich more for being able to partake more in a communities common goods, or a flat tax may be debatable, but currently, the very wealthiest do not pay their fair share due to exceptions and loop holes that their direct lobbying has created).

I assume that is basically Hillary's stance. Support children and tax the rich fairly.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
My point was mostly that "tell the audience what they want to hear" is standard politician-talk and no one in the election seems to be doing any different. Every candidate is pandering to a certain demographic, even Trump.

It's something a lot do, but I also think you could agree some do it a lot more then others.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Why the hell do they have to pay for other people child care?
Well, not just them. The idea behind a social welfare system is that everybody pays what they can to help everyone else out. That rich people have more money means that in such a system they pay more because they can afford to.

I understand why on principle a lot of people oppose that kind of system. What I don't understand is the level of passion from people who aren't and never will be rich in defending the rights of rich people to keep their money and get richer. Like, it just doesn't make sense to me.

Look at all the lies of Hilary

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/17/fact-checking-democratic-nbc-debate-south-carolina/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/01/18/fact-check-fourth-democratic-debate-clinton-sanders-omalley/78949686/

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Look at all the lies of Hilary

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/17/fact-checking-democratic-nbc-debate-south-carolina/


As far as I can see there's only one claim of Clinton's that they ruled as false, and the Clinton campaign said that she misspoke and corrected what she meant....

Um there are two links..

She lied about everything

Originally posted by Omega Vision
I understand why on principle a lot of people oppose that kind of system. What I don't understand is the level of passion from people who aren't and never will be rich in defending the rights of rich people to keep their money and get richer. Like, it just doesn't make sense to me.

Well, couple of things:


1. I think we should do away with income taxes. No more income taxes.

2. Excise taxes such as the Texas tax system. It would very much disproportionately hit rich people who spend much more money (even they they also save and invest much more money).



If a rich person needs to purchase a shit ton of stocks, then they can pay taxes on the purchase. If they need 1,000,000 tons of steel, then they can pay taxes. If you need a soda, pay a tax on it. This tax system would not hit the poor as hard as the rich. And it would be harder for the rich to get away with tax havens and loopholes.

DDM what do you think about Hilary just lying about everything?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Well, couple of things:


1. I think we should do away with income taxes. No more income taxes.

2. Excise taxes such as the Texas tax system. It would very much disproportionately hit rich people who spend much more money (even they they also save and invest much more money).



If a rich person needs to purchase a shit ton of stocks, then they can pay taxes on the purchase. If they need 1,000,000 tons of steel, then they can pay taxes. If you need a soda, pay a tax on it. This tax system would not hit the poor as hard as the rich. And it would be harder for the rich to get away with tax havens and loopholes.

Do you have some calculations how that would work out on the national level? Estimates how high it would have to be to achieve the same level, etc.?

Good job ducking out on the second link and ignoring all her lies.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Children are society's responsibility, and there are parents who are unfit to provide sufficient education or care to their children. That is not just unfair to the children, it also leads to greater problems for society down the line. It is beneficial to have well adjusted, well educated adults, and the upbringing of children is the main contributing factor of that.

Now, that means that everyone should contribute, via taxes, to ensure that all children have access to education, have enough food, and are taken care of. Rich people, who are blessed with most of the money and assets of a society should contribute their fair share to that tax pool (whether that is a progressive tax, that taxes the rich more for being able to partake more in a communities common goods, or a flat tax may be debatable, but currently, the very wealthiest do not pay their fair share due to exceptions and loop holes that their direct lobbying has created).

I assume that is basically Hillary's stance. Support children and tax the rich fairly.

So its the rich people job to pay for peoples problem with over population, and its everyone elses to pay for their abortions.

Do you know how stupid that sounds. Its like she has no brain at all.

I hope sanders leaves her in the dust where she belongs, ignorant retard she is.

You know there weren't two links when I posted.

At any rate, the two things that you quoted just can't be qualified as "total lies".

One is an exaggeration which is based on an actual difference between her and Sanders.

The other is a claim based on a prediction that turned out to be false that has however still been quoted in relatively recent publications, which could very well be just a mistake (and was very much qualified by her anyways). At any rate the underlying problem, that African American's are incarcerated at a shocking rate, much larger than White Americans, is true, so even if it was exaggerated, it's not really a bold faced lie.

You didn't even read it..

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So its the rich people job to pay for peoples problem with over population, and its everyone elses to pay for their abortions.

Do you know how stupid that sounds. Its like she has no brain at all.

I hope sanders leaves her in the dust where she belongs, ignorant retard she is.

It's everyone's jobs to pay taxes, if they are able, to contribute to the common good, yes.

When you say it's everyone elses job to pay for "their" abortions, what exactly are you referring to? It doesn't seem to be anything that Clinton said in what we are discussing.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
You didn't even read it..

I did actually read it. It is very telling that you are not replying to my posts with anything of substance.

Im saying she wants the rich to pay for everyones child care, on top of it, we already have to pay for peoples abortions.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Im saying she wants the rich to pay for everyones child care, on top of it, we already have to pay for peoples abortions.

Most abortions for low-income women are not supported by the government. Although, I of course think that abortion should be a fully funded health care option.

And everyone should pay to support children where it is needed. It's not the children's fault that they were born into poverty, or that their parents aren't very capable parents. Do you not believe in equality of opportunity? Why should poor children be completely screwed over compared to a billionaire's children?

Then why does planned parent hood get $500 million a year from us?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Then why does planned parent hood get $500 million a year from us?

Because Planned Parenthood provides many non-abortion health care services to Americans.

What do they provide besides contraceptives? It was already proven they do no provide mammograms.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
What do they provide besides contraceptives? It was already proven they do no provide mammograms.

Breast exams, pap tests, STD test, educational programs and family planning.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So its the rich people job to pay for peoples problem with over population, and its everyone elses to pay for their abortions.



No, you should totally agree with this policy.

Then we should also create policy that prevents said families from having more children........or heck even put a limit on the front end as well.


The liberal utopia, use govt force (steal) so that whatever "poorer" families can't afford they are given anyway.........in the meantime cell phones are everywhere, large screen tv's are a must, internet highspeed is required............

Originally posted by Bardock42
Breast exams, pap tests, STD test, educational programs and family planning.

Im sure that costs $500 million a year

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Im sure that costs $500 million a year

Yes.

I think you don't quite understand, or care to understand, the extend of Planned Parenthood's services, they do 400,000 Pap tests, 500,000 breast exams, 4.5 million tests and treatments for sexually transmitted infections, and they reach 1.5 million people with educational programs.

So if each of these tests and each person to teach only costs 70 dollars (and you and I know that tests and treatment by doctors is way, way, way more expensive), that would already reach the $500 million.

Its muddying the waters to get $500 million a year from the US tax payer and provide for profit abortions.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Its muddying the waters to get $500 million a year from the US tax payer and provide for profit abortions.

That may be true, but it's often the only health care option for many women at all. Planned Parenthood is one of the most effective methods to decrease abortion, for one. The ramifications when Planned Parenthoods are closed are devastating for people in the area.

Sanders Medicare for all sounds like true universal health care.

I tried to sign up for Obama care to see if it was as easy as he claimed as was denied

**** Obama care

Both Clinton and Sanders seem to want to improve Obamacare (which has helped a lot of Americans get coverage already). I think they are on the right track. The big problem that the ACA has right now, is Republican governors who block Medicaid for their citizens out of spite.

Obama care is not universal.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Obama care is not universal.

Yes, that's basically what I talked about in my post. The Medicaid gap is a real problem.

If I was black, or hispanic, I would have gotten it. They discriminated against me because I am of caucasian ethnicity and a pre existing condition.

So Obama care is a fraud.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
If I was black, or hispanic, I would have gotten it. They discriminated against me because I am of caucasian ethnicity and a pre existing condition.

So Obama care is a fraud.

Tell us more about your experience. What did you do? What did they say? Do you have insurance currently?

No I don't have insurance.

That sucks. So did they reject you because of a pre-existing condition? I thought Obamacare eliminated that in 2014.

They said I had to go apply to Medicare. Yea right

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
They said I had to go apply to Medicare. Yea right

You don't want to apply for Medicare?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
They said I had to go apply to Medicare. Yea right

That would mean that you do not make enough money to be required to purchase private health insurance on an exchange, and that you qualify for state-subsidized health care through Medicaid. That is actually a more cost-efficient option for you.

Yea and much more difficult to get and cost me way more. Medicare would cost me $200 a month.

Obamacare let me down, like many others.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea and much more difficult to get and cost me way more. Medicare would cost me $200 a month.

Obamacare let me down, like many others.

200$ per months for health care doesn't sound bad....

Obama care it's free for my income level...so they discriminated against me.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Obama care it's free for my income level...so they discriminated against me.

Well, no one ever said that Obamacare was free health care...so if you were expecting that of course you'd be let down.

Are you worse off because of Obamacare than you were before though? And if so, how?

I know many people including friends who have it free. They are minorities. Live at home and make pretty good money. And have no bills.

The question is, would your income level be covered by Medicaid according to Obamacare, if the state you are in didn't choose to opt out?

I got Medicare info. They wanted $234.00.

That's outrageous considering Obamacare is better health care and cheaper.

We need one health care. Not 40 different versions of this bullshit.

Yeah. So are you mad at Republicans for weakening the Affordable Care Act? It sucks they wouldn't let Obama do the more full implementation.

Obama does anything he wants

That's not really true though. He was stopped in a lot of things, because Republicans are unwilling to compromise on many things.

they passed all his bills and funded them.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So its the rich people job to pay for peoples problem with over population, and its everyone elses to pay for their abortions.

Do you know how stupid that sounds. Its like she has no brain at all.

I hope sanders leaves her in the dust where she belongs, ignorant retard she is.

My problem with the whole thing about rich people is what you are saying would be more valid to me if the rich didn't tend to get special treatment in various aspects of life. If we could press a magic button and cause that to happen it would be one thing, but as it stands some of them literally do whatever they want.

Imagine a world people have to pay for their own kids..

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
DDM what do you think about Hilary just lying about everything?

I've always held that Hilary Clinton is a huge liar, is a warmongering cretin, and has been extremely dishonest. She doesn't belong anywhere near government.


This is how poorly I think of Hillary Clinton: I'd rather Sarah Palin be the next US President than Hillary Clinton.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Do you have some calculations how that would work out on the national level? Estimates how high it would have to be to achieve the same level, etc.?


I'm glad you asked!


Nope.

But others have.


17.2% or something. Not sure what that number means. The UK has a VAT tax of like 20%...


About.com does a very thorough job of explaining a sales/excise tax/fair tax system.

http://economics.about.com/cs/taxpolicy/a/fairtax_2.htm


Read the whole thing.

I still say they should have a Dem Debate in a non-safe zone like in Texas. And get some one like Mark Levin to mod it.

That would be cool.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Yea and much more difficult to get and cost me way more. Medicare would cost me $200 a month.

Obamacare let me down, like many others.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Obama care it's free for my income level...so they discriminated against me.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I know many people including friends who have it free. They are minorities. Live at home and make pretty good money. And have no bills.

If your state had expanded Medicaid coverage, then you would qualify for free, based on your income alone.

Since your state did not expand Medicaid coverage, you have to qualify based on the existing rules in your state. Hence, the $234 a month fee, because you are not elderly, disabled, or have dependent children.

In other words, you are being penalized, because the Republican governor of your state refuses to accept federal funds to expand Medicaid coverage, all out of partisan spite. Refusing to establish a state exchange and refusing to expand Medicaid coverage are deliberate attempts to sabotage the health care law. They want it to fail, because they do not want Obama to have any policy accomplishments, and they do not care who gets hurt because of it.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That would mean that you do not make enough money to be required to purchase private health insurance on an exchange, and that you qualify for state-subsidized health care through Medicaid. That is actually a more cost-efficient option for you.

He said medicare though, thats an entirely different creature.

Medicare part A is free if you are 65 or had 24 months of social security benefits paid. Otherwise if you were deemed eligible then you would be required to pay a premium.

Medicaid is based on need and social welfare, with eligibility based on income. If a person has limited income and/or financial resources, Medicaid covers a broader spectrum of services than Medicare does.

It sounds like you are in muddied waters and I'd bet that if you went to the website to sign up for the aca during the open enrollment period you would get credits to offset premiums.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If your state had expanded Medicaid coverage, then you would qualify for free, based on your income alone.

Since your state did not expand Medicaid coverage, you have to qualify based on the existing rules in your state. Hence, the $234 a month fee, because you are not elderly, disabled, or have dependent children.

In other words, you are being penalized, because the Republican governor of your state refuses to accept federal funds to expand Medicaid coverage, all out of partisan spite. Refusing to establish a state exchange and refusing to expand Medicaid coverage are deliberate attempts to sabotage the health care law. They want it to fail, because they do not want Obama to have any policy accomplishments, and they do not care who gets hurt because of it.

Then why do my minority friends get it for free?

Originally posted by snowdragon
He said medicare though, thats an entirely different creature.

Medicare part A is free if you are 65 or had 24 months of social security benefits paid. Otherwise if you were deemed eligible then you would be required to pay a premium.

Medicaid is based on need and social welfare, with eligibility based on income. If a person has limited income and/or financial resources, Medicaid covers a broader spectrum of services than Medicare does.

It sounds like you are in muddied waters and I'd bet that if you went to the website to sign up for the aca during the open enrollment period you would get credits to offset premiums.

He may have said "Medicare," but clearly, since he is not 65 or older, he meant "Medicaid," so my post still applies.




Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Then why do my minority friends get it for free?

I do not know enough about your friends or your state Medicaid requirements. What percentage of the federal poverty level is their income? Do they collect SSI? Are they disabled? Do they have dependent children or older adults? There are plenty of reasons why they may qualify and you do not. None of them however, have anything to do with race, since that is not an eligibility criteria.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I've always held that Hilary Clinton is a huge liar, is a warmongering cretin, and has been extremely dishonest. She doesn't belong anywhere near government.


This is how poorly I think of Hillary Clinton: I'd rather Sarah Palin be the next US President than Hillary Clinton.




I'm glad you asked!


Nope.

But others have.


17.2% or something. Not sure what that number means. The UK has a VAT tax of like 20%...


About.com does a very thorough job of explaining a sales/excise tax/fair tax system.

http://economics.about.com/cs/taxpolicy/a/fairtax_2.htm


Read the whole thing.

17,2%... must be nice.

Maybe TI is eligible as a former soldier.

And Medicaid has different income requirements based on state, right?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Maybe TI is eligible as a former soldier.

And Medicaid has different income requirements based on state, right?

Correct.

Also I dislike the ACA. It's terrible legislation that is fully of holes and terribly implemented.

We need to really just come full circle and have a hybrid system of socialized medicine for all citizens and allow insurance to sell or pick up the difference if people aren't pleased with what the govt makes available.

While I don't agree with socialized medicine as an individual, I think for our society it would be a step up in many cases.

That's more or less the system we have in Germany.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's more or less the system we have in Germany.

Yes the US culture needs to start looking to speak beyond party lines and short term legislation driven by last weeks polls and perhaps look at other successful models we could "americanize" and embrace to enrich our country.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Maybe TI is eligible as a former soldier.

And Medicaid has different income requirements based on state, right?
Yeah, I would think he could have access to Tricare, which is great insurance (I used to have it as a military dependent).

Tricare Prime would cost me pretty much the same as Medicare.

$234.00

Thats just way to much money, considering I am pretty healthy.

I am forced to go the VA. Which is free, but shit health care.

With Obama care I could go to anyone I want.

That's a shame. I guess Tricare always made sense for me because without insurance my medicine is about 300+ a month.

The way it is now, If I get sick, I can't just go to the doctor, Guess where I have to go?

The VA Emergency Room. Wait in line, get checked in, wait some more.

It could take me up to 5 hours, just for that.

The the wait is so stupid. I should just be able to see a god damn doctor, not have to wait in line at the ER. Then I have to wait another hour or so to get a prescription cause that line is so long.

It is a god damn shame.

With Obama care, my friend can just go to any private emergency clinic, not wait in any line, go to CVS and get free prescriptions...with no deductibles or co pay.

Does Tricare offer catastrophic insurance at a reduced rate? Or are you just looking for general insurance to cover little mundane things like checkups and such?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
With Obama care I could go to anyone I want.


You would still have a network that wouldn't be ALL hospitals and physicians. It might broaden your choices but it wouldn't cover everyone as an in-network.

Of course they would have out of network benefits as well but generally those have double the out of pocket costs and less discounts.

Is that 234.00 a month or year for tricare prime, if that's monthly it sounds like a family premium not an individual.

With Obama care, my friend can just go to any private emergency clinic, not wait in any line, go to CVS and get free prescriptions...with no deductibles or co pay.

That sounds like medicaid, not typical insurance that has copays for er, outpatient, ov, perscriptions.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
The way it is now, If I get sick, I can't just go to the doctor, Guess where I have to go?

The VA Emergency Room. Wait in line, get checked in, wait some more.

It could take me up to 5 hours, just for that.

The the wait is so stupid. I should just be able to see a god damn doctor, not have to wait in line at the ER. Then I have to wait another hour or so to get a prescription cause that line is so long.

It is a god damn shame.

With Obama care, my friend can just go to any private emergency clinic, not wait in any line, go to CVS and get free prescriptions...with no deductibles or co pay.

Once again, this is a problem with your state government. VA medical facilities are administered by state, so you may receive long wait times and poor treatment in one state, but short wait times and excellent treatment in another. It is no coincidence that the VA scandal in which soldiers died waiting for treatment happened in predominately red states: Arizona, Colorado, South Carolina, Texas, and Wyoming.

I'm getting emails saying its my last chance to sign up for the ACA or be penalized.

I tried to sign up, are these ****ing for real?

I get free health care, but I have to go to the county hospital. I do not go to the ER, I have annual appointments in the pain management section and sometimes even procedures. I have a future procedure set for March. The only thing I pay for is prescriptions.

I could get the prescriptions for free from the hospital pharmacy, but the problem there is they can actually take over a week just to fill a prescription. They only rush stuff through if it is life and death stuff like antibiotics, etc. So I take my stuff to Walgreens and they can get it ready in 30 minutes. Doesn't cost too much because I belong to their prescription savings club. There are a variety of free clubs you can join to get a certain % off on a medication.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I'm getting emails saying its my last chance to sign up for the ACA or be penalized.

I tried to sign up, are these ****ing for real?

Hasn't the FINAL Sign up Day been pushed back 3 or 4 times now?

**** THIS SHIT!
I TRY SIGNING UP FOR THIS BULLSHIT, THEY DENY ME AND NOW THEY GOING TO PENALIZE ME $624!!!

**** OBAMA CARE

Figures no one cares.

Oh so its ok I am going to be penalized even though I dont qualify?

Calm thyself, do a little research and find out how to set yourself as exempt, since you don't qualify for the ACA.

Typical bait and switch tactics.

http://images.killermovies.com/forums/user_sigs/7/1/customsig_73571_Fn.gif

Not you, the government.

"here is your health care, come sign up for it"

signs up

"you don't qualify"

damn

"you will be penalized for not qualifying"

...

Now all can see here Obamacare is a sham and a lie.

I don't think your personal story has convinced anyone so far. Particularly since you don't answer any questions or explain the actual circumstances.

Oh so I'm lying now? Send me your email and I will forward you the emails I am getting to prove to you I'm not bullshitting anyone.

Here's B42's email:

[email protected]

I'm not saying you are lying, I'm saying we don't know all circumstances. Additionally apparently you could be insured for 200$ per month....

Originally posted by Robtard
Here's B42's email:

[email protected]

Originally posted by Robtard
Here's B42's email:

[email protected]

You imbecile.

You missed the perfect opportunity. His actual e-mail would be:

[email protected]


doped


Edit - Holy crap, the email tag is totally effed up.

Originally posted by Robtard
Calm thyself, do a little research and find out how to set yourself as exempt, since you don't qualify for the ACA.

He needs a Navigator: Find Someone Nearby to Help You Apply

Originally posted by dadudemon
You imbecile.

You missed the perfect opportunity. His actual e-mail would be:

[email protected]


doped


Edit - Holy crap, the email tag is totally effed up.

You and your love of all things sausage

Originally posted by Robtard
You and your love of all things sausage

Dude...brats are totes delish. With some sauerkraut (with a strong kraut for the added punch...not that bland kraut that some people use...I mean, what's the point of bland sauerkraut? Just shred and boil some cabbage, drain it, and put that on your brat if you want bland kraut), and spicy mayo? Awesome and delicious snack...


And I love spicy Italian Sausage. A well seasoned, slightly sweet, smooth marinara with spicy Italian Sausage is amazing. Add in some angel hair pasta and you have an amazing meal (usually, a light red wine goes well with this, too, but I don't like wine).

Yeah, I love sausage. But I don't like turkey sausage. All the turkey sausage I've ever had has been bland to gross.

Spicy Italian sausage is the best, imo.

Though there's this local market that makes a' lamb and jalapeno' sausage, it's amazing.

Originally posted by Robtard
Though there's this local market that makes a' lamb and jalapeno' sausage, it's amazing.

That's one of the benefits of living on the coasts near large metropolitan areas: amazing food diversity and choices. I'm in the middle of the US...diversity in food choices can sometimes be very lacking.

Yeah, I feel fortunate living where I do, the weather and food is amazing.

Aldi's sells some nice spicy italian and mild sausage.

Get back on topic, sausage lovers

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003838507/1520271832_hillaryclintoneating_xlarge.jpeg

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's one of the benefits of living on the coasts near large metropolitan areas: amazing food diversity and choices. I'm in the middle of the US...diversity in food choices can sometimes be very lacking.

Find a butcher and fish market and win, I live in SW MO and while its a bit small townish I leverage both those tools.

They'll order anything make anything you want.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Get back on topic, sausage lovers



Originally posted by snowdragon
Find a butcher and fish market and win, I live in SW MO and while its a bit small townish I leverage both those tools.

They'll order anything make anything you want.

I'll keep that in mind.


So, yeah, Bernie won.

Originally posted by Robtard
Spicy Italian sausage is the best, imo.

Though there's this local market that makes a' lamb and jalapeno' sausage, it's amazing.
Merguez>>>>chorizo>Italian sausage

I actually hate brats, I don't know why. So the Aldi's spicy italian(or mild italian) sausage isn't good to me, but people I know. I hate polish sausage too.

I also tend to rarely use any condiments on things like hot dogs. I eat them plain and people look at me weird. Haters gonna hate.