Trump Screws the 99%
Apr 27, 2017 14:26:57 #
Bevos wrote:
There you go again. Just TAKING UP SPACE. I guess it must be what you do BEST!!!
you NOT addressing any topic intelligently is what YOU do best.
Apr 27, 2017 17:30:16 #
Progressive One wrote:
you NOT addressing any topic intelligently is what YOU do best.
This is a public service announcement:
Made necessary by Prog One and other street people/rioters;
Why do liberals side with a Bilderberger billionaire elitist like George "Giorgi" Soros?
Do all liberals believe this is how America should be controlled?
“This system to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. (Bilderberg Group)” - Insider, Professor Carroll Quigley – ‘Tragedy and Hope’,( p. 324)
The Bilderberg Group meets once a year, and is blacked out by the MSM.
10 Things You Didn't Know About "Giorgi" George Soros
https://youtu.be/tfBHYxEojZk
SOROS ROTHSCHILD RACE WAR PROPAGANDA EXPOSED
https://youtu.be/lhqqz3QFQKE
George Soros: Evil Puppet Master Exposed
https://youtu.be/1eRFTHD2CTg
HILLARY FOR PRISON 2016 CAMPAIGN THEME SONG
https://youtu.be/lwl56DeNK0Q
Can't Touch Me The Hillary Song
https://youtu.be/zcTGTFNXJss
Whining Crying Rioting - Hillary Millennial Theme Song
https://youtu.be/aVlHZh5dvbA
Apr 27, 2017 20:00:44 #
Progressive One wrote:
you NOT addressing any topic intelligently is what YOU do best.
I was addressing YOU, and according to you, YOU are intelligent, supposedly, sooo....
Apr 27, 2017 20:06:27 #
Bevos wrote:
I was addressing YOU, and according to you, YOU are intelligent, supposedly, sooo....
I dislike bitch ass sarcastic motherfking men.......snippy ass men are so feminine...just say fk you or something like you grew a pair......
Apr 27, 2017 20:08:06 #
BACK STORY
Obamacare and the budget
How a certain subsidy became part of this week’s spending debate
COST-SHARING reduction payments, or CSRs, from the federal government help insurers cover low-income patients’ copayments and deductibles. Here, doctors check a patient at L.A. County-USC Medical Center. (Al Seib Los Angeles Times)
By Noam N. Levey
WASHINGTON — As President Trump and congressional leaders scrambled to put together a spending bill to keep the government from shutting down at the end of this week, negotiations almost collapsed over an arcane but critical part of the Affordable Care Act: cost-sharing reduction payments, or CSRs.
If you’ve never heard of this piece of the Obamacare puzzle, here’s a rundown of what they are, why they were pulled into Trump’s first budget fight and what their fate may be in the future.
What are the cost-sharing reduction payments?
One of the pillars of Obamacare is the insurance marketplaces that allow Americans who don’t get coverage through an employer to shop among health plans that must all cover a basic set of benefits.
Low- and moderate-income shoppers with annual incomes between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level — between about $12,000 and $48,000 — qualify for subsidies that offset the cost of their monthly insurance premiums.
Less well-known are the cost-sharing reductions. Consumers who make between 100% and 250% of the poverty line can get this additional assistance to cover copayments and deductibles if they select certain health plans on the Obamacare marketplaces.
These cost-sharing reductions mean that someone who might otherwise face an annual deductible of $2,000 or more would potentially have no deductible at all. This additional assistance can be especially important as many low-priced health plans force consumers to pay high deductibles before their medical care is covered.
This year, the CSR payments will cost the federal government about $7 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office .
Why are they an issue now?
Most spending in Obamacare is mandatory, which means that it does not require Congress to appropriate it every year in a spending bill. But there has been some debate about whether the CSR payments fall into this category.
The Obama administration initially sought congressional approval for CSR payments but later maintained this was not necessary. And since 2014, the administration had made CSR payments to lower deductibles for millions of low-income consumers.
Republicans have argued this usurped Congress’ authority over spending. Last year, a federal judge agreed with them, though she suspended her order while the case was being appealed.
What would happen if the CSR payments are stopped?
Health insurers and other experts have been warning for months that eliminating the payments could destabilize the Obamacare marketplaces and cause some insurers to stop offering health plans.
That is because the payments currently go to insurers, who use them to offset the losses they incur from covering medical expenses that consumers would normally have to pay until they reach their deductibles.
If the payments are stopped, insurers would still be barred from charging low-income consumers for deductibles. But insurers would no longer be able to get financial aid for the costs they are bearing.
Some insurance companies would probably decide that it was no longer worth selling health plans on the marketplaces. Others might conclude that they have to raise premiums to cover the additional losses.
That could cost some consumers more, particularly those who don’t qualify for government assistance.
It could also cost the federal government more, as higher premiums would mean higher subsidies for those who qualify (because the value of subsidies is tied to the cost of insurance premiums).
The additional cost of the subsidies might even outstrip the savings that would be generated by stopping the CSR payments, according to a new analysis from the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation , which estimates that stopping the CSR payments would save $10 billion in 2018 but lead to $12 billion in additional subsidy payments, assuming insurers did not abandon the Obamacare markets next year.
How did the CSR payments get dragged into the current budget debate?
To prevent an insurance market meltdown, industry officials and many Democrats urged congressional leaders to include funding for the CSR payments in the spending bill that Congress must pass this week to keep the government open.
That would make the fate of the payments less dependent on the ongoing lawsuit and prevent Trump from using them as a bargaining chip down the road, risking the collapse of insurance markets. At one point, Trump and GOP leaders had floated the idea of using the payments as a way to pressure Democrats to support funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall or to increase military spending.
The White House and GOP leaders ultimately decided against including the payments in the spending bill. But the administration said Wednesday that it would agree to keep funding the CSRs administratively, at least for now.
What could happen further down the road?
Assuming the CSR payments are not included in a future spending bill, the Trump administration could threaten to cut them off again.
That means that insurance markets will probably remain unsettled for some time, even if a collapse is not imminent.
noam.levey@latimes.com
Twitter: @noamlevey
Obamacare and the budget
How a certain subsidy became part of this week’s spending debate
COST-SHARING reduction payments, or CSRs, from the federal government help insurers cover low-income patients’ copayments and deductibles. Here, doctors check a patient at L.A. County-USC Medical Center. (Al Seib Los Angeles Times)
By Noam N. Levey
WASHINGTON — As President Trump and congressional leaders scrambled to put together a spending bill to keep the government from shutting down at the end of this week, negotiations almost collapsed over an arcane but critical part of the Affordable Care Act: cost-sharing reduction payments, or CSRs.
If you’ve never heard of this piece of the Obamacare puzzle, here’s a rundown of what they are, why they were pulled into Trump’s first budget fight and what their fate may be in the future.
What are the cost-sharing reduction payments?
One of the pillars of Obamacare is the insurance marketplaces that allow Americans who don’t get coverage through an employer to shop among health plans that must all cover a basic set of benefits.
Low- and moderate-income shoppers with annual incomes between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level — between about $12,000 and $48,000 — qualify for subsidies that offset the cost of their monthly insurance premiums.
Less well-known are the cost-sharing reductions. Consumers who make between 100% and 250% of the poverty line can get this additional assistance to cover copayments and deductibles if they select certain health plans on the Obamacare marketplaces.
These cost-sharing reductions mean that someone who might otherwise face an annual deductible of $2,000 or more would potentially have no deductible at all. This additional assistance can be especially important as many low-priced health plans force consumers to pay high deductibles before their medical care is covered.
This year, the CSR payments will cost the federal government about $7 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office .
Why are they an issue now?
Most spending in Obamacare is mandatory, which means that it does not require Congress to appropriate it every year in a spending bill. But there has been some debate about whether the CSR payments fall into this category.
The Obama administration initially sought congressional approval for CSR payments but later maintained this was not necessary. And since 2014, the administration had made CSR payments to lower deductibles for millions of low-income consumers.
Republicans have argued this usurped Congress’ authority over spending. Last year, a federal judge agreed with them, though she suspended her order while the case was being appealed.
What would happen if the CSR payments are stopped?
Health insurers and other experts have been warning for months that eliminating the payments could destabilize the Obamacare marketplaces and cause some insurers to stop offering health plans.
That is because the payments currently go to insurers, who use them to offset the losses they incur from covering medical expenses that consumers would normally have to pay until they reach their deductibles.
If the payments are stopped, insurers would still be barred from charging low-income consumers for deductibles. But insurers would no longer be able to get financial aid for the costs they are bearing.
Some insurance companies would probably decide that it was no longer worth selling health plans on the marketplaces. Others might conclude that they have to raise premiums to cover the additional losses.
That could cost some consumers more, particularly those who don’t qualify for government assistance.
It could also cost the federal government more, as higher premiums would mean higher subsidies for those who qualify (because the value of subsidies is tied to the cost of insurance premiums).
The additional cost of the subsidies might even outstrip the savings that would be generated by stopping the CSR payments, according to a new analysis from the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation , which estimates that stopping the CSR payments would save $10 billion in 2018 but lead to $12 billion in additional subsidy payments, assuming insurers did not abandon the Obamacare markets next year.
How did the CSR payments get dragged into the current budget debate?
To prevent an insurance market meltdown, industry officials and many Democrats urged congressional leaders to include funding for the CSR payments in the spending bill that Congress must pass this week to keep the government open.
That would make the fate of the payments less dependent on the ongoing lawsuit and prevent Trump from using them as a bargaining chip down the road, risking the collapse of insurance markets. At one point, Trump and GOP leaders had floated the idea of using the payments as a way to pressure Democrats to support funding for a U.S.-Mexico border wall or to increase military spending.
The White House and GOP leaders ultimately decided against including the payments in the spending bill. But the administration said Wednesday that it would agree to keep funding the CSRs administratively, at least for now.
What could happen further down the road?
Assuming the CSR payments are not included in a future spending bill, the Trump administration could threaten to cut them off again.
That means that insurance markets will probably remain unsettled for some time, even if a collapse is not imminent.
noam.levey@latimes.com
Twitter: @noamlevey
Apr 28, 2017 08:06:52 #
Ve'hoe; Thank you for adding more clarity to the real Progressive One.
"It is my experience, that education, and the demands of leadership, are not conducive to lying, hate, and such anger... people like that cannot control it... which is why he is here to get the respect he feels cheated out of. It is unlikely that any of it is true.. at least the symptoms he reveals,," - Ve'hoe
You nailed Progressive One on his name changing! He can't hide style. A keeper!!!!
But,,, you are one of the worst racists here...... Kevin,,, that is why you have had to change your avatar and name several times......first you were Khh1 then Democrat in 2016,, now prog one,,,,,,,
Here are some of your quotes,,,, and I have never called you a racist name... how do you explain that,,, other than lying like you did here???
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
br 1. yeah and your mom gave her twat away while... (show quote)
Khh1 wrote:
. YOU LITTLE DELUSIONAL CUNT, THIS IS WHAT YOU SAI... (show quote)
Progressive One wrote:
you're probably right but I do spend a lot of my t... (show quote)
I am on PO2016 like stink on a skunk.
"It is my experience, that education, and the demands of leadership, are not conducive to lying, hate, and such anger... people like that cannot control it... which is why he is here to get the respect he feels cheated out of. It is unlikely that any of it is true.. at least the symptoms he reveals,," - Ve'hoe
You nailed Progressive One on his name changing! He can't hide style. A keeper!!!!
But,,, you are one of the worst racists here...... Kevin,,, that is why you have had to change your avatar and name several times......first you were Khh1 then Democrat in 2016,, now prog one,,,,,,,
Here are some of your quotes,,,, and I have never called you a racist name... how do you explain that,,, other than lying like you did here???
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
br 1. yeah and your mom gave her twat away while... (show quote)
Khh1 wrote:
. YOU LITTLE DELUSIONAL CUNT, THIS IS WHAT YOU SAI... (show quote)
Progressive One wrote:
you're probably right but I do spend a lot of my t... (show quote)
I am on PO2016 like stink on a skunk.
Apr 28, 2017 08:16:47 #
Progressive One wrote:
I dislike bitch ass sarcastic motherfking men.......snippy ass men are so feminine...just say fk you or something like you grew a pair......
WHY would I want to "GROW a PAIR"???
Apr 28, 2017 08:39:45 #
Bevos wrote:
I was addressing YOU, and according to you, YOU are intelligent, supposedly, sooo....
Bevos wrote:
There you go with your FOUL MOUTH again. You JUST CAN'T Converse without it. CAN you???
you motherfking right I can't!!! The words feel so motherfking good!!! haha..........
Apr 28, 2017 08:44:53 #
eagleye13 wrote:
Bevos wrote:
There you go with your FOUL MOUTH again. You JUST CAN'T Converse without it. CAN you???
you motherfking right I can't!!! The words feel so motherfking good!!! haha..........
There you go with your FOUL MOUTH again. You JUST CAN'T Converse without it. CAN you???
you motherfking right I can't!!! The words feel so motherfking good!!! haha..........
I read that. I just chalked it up to his total IGNORANCE!!! He wants me to "grow a pair"!! HA! HA! HA! HA!
Apr 28, 2017 09:20:51 #
Bevos wrote:
I read that. I just chalked it up to his total IGN... (show quote)
Ve'hoe; Thank you for adding more clarity to the real Progressive One.
"It is my experience, that education, and the demands of leadership, are not conducive to lying, hate, and such anger... people like that cannot control it... which is why he is here to get the respect he feels cheated out of. It is unlikely that any of it is true.. at least the symptoms he reveals,," - Ve'hoe
You nailed Progressive One on his name changing! He can't hide style. A keeper!!!!
But,,, you are one of the worst racists here...... Kevin,,, that is why you have had to change your avatar and name several times......first you were Khh1 then Democrat in 2016,, now prog one,,,,,,,
Here are some of your quotes,,,, and I have never called you a racist name... how do you explain that,,, other than lying like you did here???
A Democrat In 2016 wrote:
br 1. yeah and your mom gave her twat away while... (show quote)
1. yeah and your mom gave her twat away while wearing a headdress...wanting people to shout pochahantas! when they shot their wad up in her dookey chute.....because the pussy was so loose from wear and tear.....high mileage squaw...that her vagina lips would flap when the wind blew...so her asshole was the better option...offered memories of what the pussy used to feel like.....dumb lobster-colored bitch.......
2. filthy animal...and you're the one that lives in a tent...pun intended.....
Khh1 wrote:
. YOU LITTLE DELUSIONAL CUNT, THIS IS WHAT YOU SAI... (show quote)
. YOU LITTLE DELUSIONAL CUNT, THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID.....NOT THAT I GIVE A PHUCK, I JUST RESPOND IN KIND AS A MATTER OF PRINICIPLE:
SO PHUCK YOU....I'M NOT GOING TO ARGUE WITH YOU LIKE YOUR GAY LOVER OR SOME WEIRD SCHIT....AND THAT IS NO AFFRONT TO GAY GUYS.....BUT THEY TEND TO ARGUE BACK AND FORTH LIKE WOMEN INSTEAD OF AVOIDING EACH OTHER OR JUST BOXING TO CANCEL THE DEBATE....SO i AM DONE....PHUCK YOU......
Progressive One wrote:
you're probably right but I do spend a lot of my t... (show quote)
you're probably right but I do spend a lot of my time elsewhere....at work, in my class, mentoring youngsters.......yeah these people are a twofold thing....since they are nasty and racist and hateful, it is kind of fun to be able to watch them be really motivated to act ignorant and then become either a)more meek as they retreat when challenged on an intellectual basis or b) act even more ignorant as they try to compensate and mask the fact they do not know jack shit…..
Bevos wrote:
There you go with your FOUL MOUTH again. You JUST CAN'T Converse without it. CAN you???
you motherfking right I can't!!! The words feel so motherfking good!!! haha..........
I am on PO2016 like stink on a skunk.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.