I owe some DUers an apology.

[patrice]

57. +1 Why aren't we asking, god forbid!!, what could be bought in terms of loophole abatement, or solar

investments, or housing for the homeless, or childcare, or greater health care insurance subsidies, or expand the income qualifiers on the low end for those health care insurance subsidies, or . . . .

WHY aren't we asking what could be bought for a minimal amount of stress in somekind of CPI (and there are apparently at least a few different kinds of CPIs) especially if that could then put us in a position to also get something like a Wall Street tax, or an increase in the top tax rates, or REALLY go after all of the middle-wo/men (not the care givers) jacking the costs of health care up?

EVERY time this stuff starts on this board, I can't help but wonder, if those involved REALLY do think it's a simple as one issue at a time. They ridicule the chess analogy, but ridiculous is it to think that any of this is treated as though it were separate from any other part of it? I think Social Security should be protected and perpetuated FOREVER too, but that doesn't mean that I won't consider a little stress on my benefit in order to get a debit of another order elsewhere in my life.

What gives here? I really don't understand. Some people really ARE up against it worse than others, maybe they can still be protected as Senator Sanders suggests, but maybe some of the rest of the sturm und drang that keeps getting repeated on this issue is about people having too much time on the internet, a storm generated locally here, that'd be much different if more of us were doing other things for our issues.

Why isn't DU asking itself: Solar? vs. No CPI? Environment seems so dreadfully threatening and the poor will suffer the most from the changes and, yet, we're going to destroy whatever political base for action PO has over a CPI that might not even apply to most of us? What do I NOT understand here?

Priorities?

:shakeshead: