Bloomberg Business @business 1h1 hour ago
U.S. retiree health-care costs rise by 11%, with estimated $245,000 bill in years ahead http://bloom.bg/1Ol6yUQ
rascals...
Longer life expectancies, you mean? Yeah, rascals!Bloomberg Business @business 1h1 hour ago
U.S. retiree health-care costs rise by 11%, with estimated $245,000 bill in years ahead http://bloom.bg/1Ol6yUQ
rascals...
Longer life expectancies, you mean? Yeah, rascals!
Are these not issues you have talked about needing addressed?:Longer life expectancies, you mean? Yeah, rascals!
Fresh from the "whatthehellletstryit" dept:
The Hill @thehill 5m5 minutes ago
White House: ObamaCare can help stop gun violence http://hill.cm/zdlw3kE
Wonder if Obamacare can help stop insurance's increasingly high deductibles too.
The argument I'm making is an ad hoc approach to gun acquisition is weak, we need a comprehensive national approach that makes sense in order for it to be effective.
On second thought, theyre right. Obamacare would make it almost impossible for anyone to afford buying a gun.
Those categories account for almost every aspect of health care spending, so yes?Are these not issues you have talked about needing addressed?:
The estimated annual increase in medical and prescription expenses stands at 4 percent to 5 percent, about the same as last year. Prescription costs are trending higher than medical, at slightly above 7 percent, said Sunit Patel, senior vice president of Fidelity's Benefits Consulting group. Prescription drug costs account for 23 percent of that $245,000 figure. Money spent on deductibles and cost-sharing with an insurer make up 43 percent, and 34 percent goes to Medicare Part B and D premiums.
But more stringent regulations just dont work, so thats a waste of time and an unnecessary infringement upon constitutional rights.
Plus I dont recall any mass shooters that had medical evidence of mental instability that would have even been screened out of a gun purchase.
Still increasing at multiples of rise in income and retirement savings. Bottomline, healthcare inflation is a major issue and was not really addressed in UCA (well it was, but was promised to go the other way and also add jobs and many other things, thus the "rascals" line). No real components of competition or cost control.
"Health care spending" =/= premiums and deductiblesStill increasing at multiples of rise in income and retirement savings. Bottomline, healthcare inflation is a major issue and was not really addressed in UCA (well it was, but was promised to go the other way and also add jobs and many other things, thus the "rascals" line). No real components of competition or cost control.
There is a good body of evidence, some of which was linked earlier in this tread during the previous shooting, that rejects that notion.
How would we know if they were never screened?
The vast majority of Americans including NRA members support mandatory background checks. That's only one thing to fix a complex problem and admittedly the results will be marginal. But "marginal" can be quantified as at least a few hundred lives a year. I think those that reject this one simple measure are selfishly saying that their conveniences are more important than someone else's life. That's a hard position to support.
The mass shootings are becoming an enormous issue and it isn't satisfactory to simply throw up your hands and say we can do nothing and every idea that is floated to solve the problem "won't work". AS a country and as a people I'm confident we CAN do much better.
The poors had and still have Medicaid Willie. The working class - folks that earn a living but not enough to buy insurance are effected - but what did they have before ACA? nothing - everything was out of pocket.
At least now if a major health issue comes up they won't have to declare bankruptcy leave their home and live in a pup tent.
I am not talking about marijuana, I am talking about the more destructive drugs being used and pushed that are destroying peoples lives. But, that was not the main point. Just because something in illegal does not mean it is going to stop people from getting/doing it. In the case of guns, many people believe that once you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them. Also, if they are outlawed, what is next? I know, many say that they do not want to outlaw them, only make them harder to get. The first step in eliminating anything is invoke tighter restrictions.I'm ok with stripped down gun laws, because if someone wants a gun they're gonna get one. So I hope you are implying there are too many drug laws, too, by the same reasoning. We don't need big government telling people they can't smoke a joint.
Agreed, however I can see them using backdoor tactics to try. Such as what we have already seen in the recent past with anti-gun activist and politicians wanting to put a ban on what they were falsely (and later admitting so) defining as assault weapons when they already knew a ban existed on the real thing since about 1993. Deceptive tactics to try and get them another way.Does anyone really believe that the US government will actually try to come take people's guns? It would be a civil war and a lot of people would die defending their right to bear arms.
it won't happen
You mean the same "adjusted" stats where you argued Chicago was less violent that most other places?
What we do know, is all the highly publicized mass murders were done by people with no real mental health history, except the kid who ran over all those people with his car.
They still won't use their insurance because their oop and deductibles are too high.
What are the deductibles to you have any figures? $6000, $8000? I doubt that would force many people into bankruptcy or cause them to lose their home.
Perhaps they are dumbing it down for the Republicans.Obama's SoTU addresses have been spoken at the lowest grade level in POTUS history, 6th...less than Bush.
BTW Trump has beaten them all, his speeches come in at a 5th grade level.
It's the stupid American Electorate they are trying to speak to.Perhaps they are dumbing it down for the Republicans.
I want Dee to personally come take my gun when he gets his law passed.
or the 2/1 ratio of votes he got from people that failed to graduate hs.Perhaps they are dumbing it down for the Republicans.
LOL...you need to check your data.or the 2/1 ratio of votes he got from people that failed to graduate hs.
you are a data science denier
Guess that means Republicans pander to bigots and science haters.fuzz if you really don't think the Dem party panders to idiots and detached voters you really should hire your services out to Card Chronicle for a while.
You have exit polling data to link?Guess that means Republicans pander to bigots and science haters.