Jarqui
Jarqui's Journal
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Aug 23, 2015, 02:58 PM
Number of posts: 8,976
Number of posts: 8,976
Journal Archives
Clear up some disinformation in the media
"Mr. Sanders’s story continues with fantastical claims about how he would make the European social model work in the United States. He admits that he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan, and he promises massive savings on health-care costs that would translate into generous benefits for ordinary people, putting them well ahead, on net. But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want."Washington Post Editorial January 27, 2015 In protest, I refuse to link to lies for quoting a paragraph. It's not a matter of Bernie admitting "he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan" That line for heath spending per capita in the US in the graph below is much longer than any other country ![]() Who do you think pays for those costs? Americans -every single over priced dime. Some of it was collected as Americans paid into social programs while they worked. Some of it was paid by Americans employers as a part of their compensation. Some of is paid with tax dollars collected from Americans or American companies. Some of it paid for by health premiums Americans pay for. etc. The most expensive health care on the planet by far is already paid for by Americans. Bernie doesn't "HAVE raise taxes" on anyone to get this healthcare. The problem that chart shows you is that Americans are being ripped off. ![]() It's been trending that way for a long time. And you're not getting your money's worth: ![]() Republicans and corporate America whine about "big government" all the time. Everything that ails us is due to BIG incompetent government. But you know what that chart shows and proves? That's not true - certainty not true in this case. And it hasn't been true for decades. It shows that single payer or universal care provided by governments kicks the crap out of corporate America private health care as a better bang for the buck - because that's where a big chunk of these excessive costs come from - corporate administration, profits, overheads, CEOs, etc. It's certainly not all of the problem. there's much to be done with other drug costs, doctors costs, etc But it's 31% of private healthcare cost that do not add value to the well being of a patient. These are corporate opportunist leeches sucking the financial blood out of the afflicted. Americans are paying about $1.5 trillion dollars a year extra in part to satisfy to these corporate parasites in significant part because America got sucked into this "big government is bad" GOP nonsense that's proven to be BS. And these companies are stuffing politicians pockets and campaigns with six figure speaking fees or contributions because that's peanuts in the bigger scheme of $1.5 trillion in excess annual healthcare business. When a country is spending that much on healthcare, that country doesn't have to raise another dime. They're already spending 2.5 times the average of everyone else and way more than anyone else. So there is lots of money to do whatever they want with healthcare. Money available for healthcare at the country level is not the problem. So no taxes "have" to be raised. The Washington Post is full of shit on some of their arguments and too stupid to realize it. The problem is: Bernie would like to get Americans a better deal. Bernie doesn't want to see the average American get ripped off on excessive health insurance costs any more. They've been doing it for years and cleaned out the savings of a lot of Americans. Bernie's plans can be adjusted. But more money isn't the issue. He wants Americans to get a fair shake in what they're paying for their healthcare. Hillary has stated in effect, she's staying the course and will nibble at the problem through the ACA. The GOP is always whining about the debt. But they never seem to whine about private heathcare costs: ![]() We have to fix this for America's fiscal survival: ![]() ![]() So corporate owned America don't want Bernie or the Americans he represents to fix this. They do not want to stop collecting the growing $1.5 trillion in excess healthcare costs. Hillary is on the record as saying it's "too hard" and "never, ever". She's going to tinker with the ACA. Bernie is trying to do more that fix healthcare with his plan. He's trying to also make an adjustment for income inequality. The average person doesn't have to pay $5,000 in health insurance any more but they have to give back $500 of that savings in taxes (probably to shut the GOP up about it being a freebee/entitlement). He gets employers to largely pick up the balance. And he saves a bunch on much of the 31% in overhead, admin, CEO, profits of private heathcare to pay for those who don't have any healthcare. That doesn't have to be the final plan. If there are issues with it, it can be adjusted. But it is not a stupid pipe dream financially. And it has to be done. I'm not sure any of the above helps but I thought I'd take a shot. It up to you to decide which of those candidates you think is right. |
Posted by Jarqui | Sun Jan 31, 2016, 09:23 AM (6 replies)
Elizabeth Warren weighs in with an Opinion for your consideration
Elizabeth Warren: One Way to Rebuild Our Institutions
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/opinion/elizabeth-warren-one-way-to-rebuild-our-institutions.html?_r=0 WASHINGTON — WHILE presidential candidates from both parties feverishly pitch their legislative agendas, voters should also consider what presidents can do without Congress. Agency rules, executive actions and decisions about how vigorously to enforce certain laws will have an impact on every American, without a single new bill introduced in Congress. It didn't change my mind because I already think I've picked the right horse but it may help those on the fence |
Posted by Jarqui | Sat Jan 30, 2016, 05:57 PM (8 replies)
Bullet hole found at Sanders campaign HQ on day candidate was present
Source: Las Vegas Sun A bullet hole was discovered in a storefront window at the Bernie Sanders campaign headquarters in northwest Las Vegas on Thursday morning, the same day the Democratic presidential candidate was on site, Metro Police said today. Officers responded just before noon to the campaign office at 815 South Rainbow Blvd., near Alta Drive, authorities said. Police said it appears a bullet went through the window but declined to comment on whether a shot had been fired. ... The Sanders campaign on Monday called the bullet hole “an issue of serious concern” but did not elaborate on specifics of the situation. "It is being investigated by the appropriate authorities,” said Jeff Weaver, Sanders’ campaign manager. "Beyond that, we generally don’t like to talk about security matters. We’ll just leave it there — just to say that it’s a serious concern." Read more: http://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/jan/08/bullet-hole-found-at-sanders-campaign-hq-on-day-ca/ So that might explain why the Secret Service has finally been called in ... I will be devastated and beyond boiling outrage if they hurt him |
Posted by Jarqui | Sat Jan 30, 2016, 05:44 PM (9 replies)
Clinton Iowa Volunteers Train When To Push Backers To O’Malley — To Block Bernie
Source: BuzzFeed Hillary Clinton’s campaign for president is instructing its Iowa caucus leaders to — in certain cases — throw support to former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, with the goal blocking her main opponent, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, from securing additional delegates. The tactical move is rooted in the complex math of the Iowa caucuses Monday night, where the campaign is looking to defeat Sanders in a state whose caucus-goers have historically backed progressive challengers. ... The goal, in the caucuses’ complex terms, is to cost Clinton no delegates in the state’s 1,681 caucuses while ensuring stray O’Malley supporters don’t defect to Sanders. .. “It’s sad and telling that their campaign doesn’t think they can win without these kinds of tactics,” said Rania Batrice, Sanders’s Iowa spokesperson. “At the end of the day though, we believe in the caucus process and know it’s in the very capable hands of Iowans.” Read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/hillary-bernie-math#.hg45E8zrJE I was limited by the number of paragraphs. There is a history of this sort of thing at the Iowa caucuses that the article explains |
Posted by Jarqui | Sat Jan 30, 2016, 05:24 PM (33 replies)
Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement Action Fund endorses Bernie
http://www.thegazette.com/subject/opinion/letters-to-the-editor/iowa-group-endorses-bernie-sanders-20160129
To the editor: Since the Clinton machine seems to have been kind of buying up endorsements I thought I'd make an effort to even the playing field a bit. I was just checking out other papers in Iowa to see what was going on and if I could help out when I came across this. |
Posted by Jarqui | Fri Jan 29, 2016, 12:19 PM (0 replies)
Clinton email prober had deeper role in inquiry into 2000 Clinton campaign
Source: Politico An official overseeing State Department investigations stemming from Hillary Clinton's email practices had a greater role than previously acknowledged in a probe of Clinton's first Senate campaign, according to a subpoena reviewed by POLITICO. ... However, a grand jury subpoena issued to Clinton's Senate campaign committee in January 2003 which bears Seide's name and title as an assistant U.S. Attorney and appears to have been hand-initialed by him made sweeping demands for the campaign's financial and fund-raising records. The materials covered by the subpoena are so wide-ranging that they do not appear consistent with a probe focused on the financial dealings of a single donor or company. ... In December 2003, a grand jury in Los Angeles indicted Clinton's national finance director David Rosen on four felony charges of intentionally underreporting in-kind donations by Paul for the gala by more than $700,000. After a three-week trial in 2005, a jury acquitted Rosen of all the pending counts. The joint fundraising committee subsequently paid a civil penalty to the Federal Election Commission and updated its finance reports to reflect the in-kind gifts. The law in force at the time permitted unlimited "soft money" gifts to such fundraisers. Clinton allies have raised questions about the impartiality of the leadership of the State inspector general's office. Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) said the probe of the 2000 campaign "amounted to nothing" and that Seide's role raised in the prior inquiry and the current ones raised "all sorts of questions." Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/01/clinton-email-prober-had-deeper-role-in-inquiry-into-2000-clinton-campaign-218407 There's more and there's a link of a previous story that would give you some useful background on this. I haven't fully digested the significance of the report (many probably won't be interested) because the email story has gotten complex. Maybe folks would like to chime in and see how this fits or doesn't fit with what is going on. |
Posted by Jarqui | Fri Jan 29, 2016, 12:12 PM (8 replies)
Nick Johnson "Why I'm supporting Bernie Sanders for president"
http://www.thegazette.com/subject/opinion/guest-columnists/why-im-supporting-bernie-sanders-for-president-20160126
... Nicholas Johnson bio http://law.uiowa.edu/nicholas-johnson ... A pretty good endorsement from an informed and experienced Iowa retired professor with no political dog in this hunt. |
Posted by Jarqui | Fri Jan 29, 2016, 09:17 AM (1 replies)
Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren May Have Just Saved Consumers $14 Billion
Source: Huffington Post WASHINGTON -- Cable customers who are tired of paying through the nose to rent set-top boxes are about to see some serious savings, thanks to a new proposal from the Federal Communications Commission. The new regulation would open up the set-top box market to consumer choice so that customers could rent or buy devices from providers other than their cable companies. About 99 percent of cable customers currently rent set-top boxes from their cable company. According to a survey commissioned by Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), cable customers pay an average of $232 a year for those rentals -- a $20 billion market annually, just for set-top box rentals. ... Cable companies and their lobbyists are furious about the plan, which the commission is set to vote on Feb. 18. But the proposal didn't emerge from a vacuum. Liberal senators have been pressuring the FCC to act on cable "monopolies" for months. In July, current Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) organized a letter calling on the agency to collect a host of consumer pricing information from cable companies -- a move designed to show that in many regions of the country, households pay arbitrarily high prices due to a lack of other cable options. Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Markey and Blumenthal all signed on to the letter. Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fcc-proposal-cable-tv-boxes_us_56aa781ae4b05e4e3703b26e Way to go Bernie and Elizabeth!! (though we have to wait for Feb 18th vote to really celebrate) |
Posted by Jarqui | Thu Jan 28, 2016, 08:39 PM (82 replies)
I'll focus on this lame crap:
Mr. Sanders’s story continues with fantastical claims about how he would make the European social model work in the United States. He admits that he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan, and he promises massive savings on health-care costs that would translate into generous benefits for ordinary people, putting them well ahead, on net. But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want. Unfortunately, The Editorial Board of the Washington just flunked reading comprehension. Sanders got an economist to lay out his proposal financially https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/friedman-memo-1.pdf FeeltheBern: BERNIE SANDERS ON HEALTHCARE http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-healthcare/ See section on: How the heck are we going to pay for it? Sanders site: Medicare for All https://berniesanders.com/medicareforall/ See section on: HOW MUCH WILL IT COST AND HOW DO WE PAY FOR IT? One thing a high school level journalist knows is that when they're going to write about something, they should research it a little. And if they're confused or want to know more (which they normally should if they're going to write about a subject), then they should try to contact a group like the Sanders campaign to get whatever understanding or clarification they require. The Sanders campaign is in the business right now of clarifying their policies to the media. Has that happened here with the Washington Post? No way. I'd flunk their high school level of journalism. And if they were really stuck, all they had to do was ask one of their other reporters who told Washington Post readers how it was going to be paid for right here!!!: Bernie Sanders’s health-care plan is the biggest attack on the rich of this campaign https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/17/bernie-sanders-new-health-care-plan-is-his-biggest-attack-on-the-rich-so-far/ We also know that, by Sanders' accounting, the plan would actually put more money into the pockets of all but the very richest Americans. A bunch of these guys were also able to figure it out: http://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/politifact-how-much-would-bernie-sanders-health-care-plan-cost-the-middle/2261384 Others, however, are more optimistic that Sanders' plan could be actuarially sound. Right now, the United States spends about $3 trillion (roughly) on healthcare covering about 90% of it's people. Let's do really simplistic ballpark math. 1. We want to cover the final 10% of those not covered so (and this is excessive) let's add 10% of $3 trillion (in fact, it's closer to half that according to Krugman). 2. Corporation / healthcare insurance company profits do not have to be paid anymore. There's 5% roughly 3. Administration costs go way down. Let's be conservative and say 5% savings. So with single payer, we've simply added the 29 million people who don't have it (10%) and chopped corporate profit (5%) and admin costs savings (5%) you get with single payer. And it hasn't cost the United States a fucking dime. It's not rocket science to figure this out. In fact, the real numbers are about twice as good as that: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-system-cost July 2013: Economist Gerald Friedman, Ph.D., University of Massachusetts, Amherst A fair review of Sanders plan to provide Medicare for All determines in the opinion of many that it's plausible. All those other folks above could figure it out but not the Washington Post Editorial Board ... who are owned by the corporate interests Sanders is going after. I go back with the Washington Post to before Watergate. That's the most pathetic drivel I've ever read from their Editorial Board in my life. It's a lazy man's mindless bullshit deliberately intended to misinform and smear a candidate. |
Posted by Jarqui | Thu Jan 28, 2016, 01:58 AM (0 replies)
Sanders +8 in NH Poll, More Electable against Trump & Bloomberg than Hillary
http://media.wix.com/ugd/3bebb2_fdba60d808d0424aabe75c667d268972.pdf
Sanders holds a steady lead over Clinton of 52% to 44%. Another good result for Bernie who is +13.8 in RealClear's poll of polls http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_presidential_primary-3351.html |
Posted by Jarqui | Wed Jan 27, 2016, 05:05 PM (4 replies)