2018 mid-term election

[Dr. Keith]

That depends.

For me, there is an amount taken out of my check, but there is also an amount that my employer pays that never passes through my check. Because of my position, I know that the employer portion is much higher than the portion that shows up on my check.

If my employer's contribution were paid to me as part of my salary, yes, it would be an increase. But if it was only the portion I pay, then it would be a noticable decrease in my take home pay.

Do you earn about the median income for American families (about $60,000) or more?

I haven't run the numbers, but I assume that for families earning less than $60,000 they pay more for health insurance than they do in federal income taxes. And for a lot of families making more than $60k that still holds true if their employer isn't as generous as yours.

We were just looking over my wife's pay stubs and while her salary has gone up a fair amount over the last 10 years her take home pay has only gone up about $100 per month. Every increase in pay has been largely offset by a corresponding increase in health insurance cost. What was once a very generous employer has slowly become less and less generous over time.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I'd bet it would too.

What I don't get about the Democrats and the health care fight is how stupidly they play this game.

If I was the Democrats, I'd roll out commercials showing how Universal Coverage is almost Universal all over the Western world. Do Americans really deserve less?

The idea that the United States cannot do this is awful. I'd juxtapose commercials with middle class Americans struggling with paying insurance or hospital bills and Canadians, Brits, Norwegians, etc. smiling over how they don't worry about medical bills.

When your Congressman or Senator tells you it can't be done, just say "get it done, or get out of the way".

Yeah, I heard something yesterday about 50% of cancer patients in the US have spent their life's savings within two years of diagnosis. That is just ****** up.

 

[Belz...]

Yeah, I heard something yesterday about 50% of cancer patients in the US have spent their life's savings within two years of diagnosis. That is just ****** up.

I read about medical debt in the US a year or two ago. It was heartwrenching. And often even with insurance, it turns out you're not covered.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

this describes the situation:

https://theweek.com/cartoons/802796...hcare-midterm-elections-preexisting-condition

 

[jimbob]

I read about medical debt in the US a year or two ago. It was heartwrenching. And often even with insurance, it turns out you're not covered.

This thread?

This 2009 paper is relevant:
Medical Bankruptcy in the United States, 2007:
Results of a National Study (PDF)

ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Our 2001 study in 5 states found that medical problems contributed to at least 46.2% of all bankruptcies. Since then, health costs and the numbers of un- and underinsured have increased, and bankruptcy laws have tightened.
METHODS: We surveyed a random national sample of 2314 bankruptcy filers in 2007, abstracted their court records, and interviewed 1032 of them. We designated bankruptcies as “medical” based on debtors’ stated reasons for filing, income loss due to illness, and the magnitude of their medical debts.
RESULTS: Using a conservative definition, 62.1% of all bankruptcies in 2007 were medical; 92% of these medical debtors had medical debts over $5000, or 10% of pretax family income. The rest met criteria for medical bankruptcy because they had lost significant income due to illness or mortgaged a home to pay medical bills. Most medical debtors were well educated, owned homes, and had middle-class occupations. Three quarters had health insurance. Using identical definitions in 2001 and 2007, the share of bankruptcies attributable to medical problems rose by 49.6%. In logistic regression analysis controlling for demographic factors, the odds that a bankruptcy had a medical cause was 2.38-fold higher in 2007 than in 2001.
CONCLUSIONS: Illness and medical bills contribute to a large and increasing share of US bankruptcies.

New highlighting

 

[Belz...]

This thread?



New highlighting

No. I don't know if it was a link from here or if I just found it elsewhere.

 

[jimbob]

No. I don't know if it was a link from here or if I just found it elsewhere.

As you say, gut-wrenching.

There are enough US posters here who have shared their personal experiences of the US healthcare system to show how it fails people - even if they initially have a good job with good coverage at the start of a chronic condition.

They are not pleasant reading for anyone with a shred of empathy.

 

[zorro99]

I’m going to vote for the Democrats next month.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

PBS Frontline's Sick Around America documentary is worth a watch if you're not from the US and want to know just how bad the situation is.

 

[Mumbles]

A Republican PAC in Arkansas has run a political ad so over the top that even the candidate they're supporting has condemned it.

THis happens from time to time - and it's always obnoxiously over the top.



Not that dems haven't released clunkers from time to time, of course, but they usually hold back on the stereotypes and over-the-top accents.

I don't remember Kav being tortured and killed over a made-up charge that was just a pretext for racial terrorism, though, so that's not a good analogy. Also - the GOP's led by a birther who said there were "fine people" at a white nationalist riot and has a decades long history of racism. I'd say that voter suppression is their best bet this time around.

 

[River]

THis happens from time to time - and it's always obnoxiously over the top.



Not that dems haven't released clunkers from time to time, of course, but they usually hold back on the stereotypes and over-the-top accents.

I don't remember Kav being tortured and killed over a made-up charge that was just a pretext for racial terrorism, though, so that's not a good analogy. Also - the GOP's led by a birther who said there were "fine people" at a white nationalist riot and has a decades long history of racism. I'd say that voter suppression is their best bet this time around.

I can support Trump having a long history of helping minorities, and being rewarded for it. I'd love to see your support for his "racist" history. Please, don't insult our intelligence by linking something ambiguous.

 

[quadraginta]

And in other 'There is no voter suppression.' news, the town of Dodge City, KA, pop. 27,000 (60% Hispanic, which I'm sure is an unrelated detail ) has had it's single polling place moved outside of town, to a location which is more than a mile from the nearest bus stop.

More than 13,000 registered voters. One polling place. And I guess having it in town was too convenient.

 

[Belz...]

And in other 'There is no voter suppression.' news, the town of Dodge City, KA pop.27,000 (60% Hispanic, which I'm sure is an unrelated detail ) has had it's single polling place moved outside of town, to a location which is more than a mile from the nearest bus stop.

More than 13,000 registered voters. One polling place. And I guess having it in town was too convenient.

 

[WilliamSeger]

 

[Parsman]

I can support Trump having a long history of helping minorities, and being rewarded for it. I'd love to see your support for his "racist" history. Please, don't insult our intelligence by linking something ambiguous.

The Central Park 5? The court case his company lost over letting property to Black people? The "good people on both sides" quote after Charlottesville? "My black" at his rally? "S**thole countries" in Africa? Yeah DJT isn't racist... stupid, bigoted and illiterate, but no not racist... well maybe just a bit.

 

[Delvo]

Frankly, I really don't understand... so many of the republican policies are disliked by people. So many people dislike Trump as a person... how can the polling results be as close as they are?

Most Trump supporters have ideas about the two parties' policies that are very different from their actual policies.

A Republican PAC in Arkansas has run a political ad so over the top that even the candidate they're supporting has condemned it.

So you get the choice of whether to be a racist or a misogynist... just like being a Democrat in 2008!

 

[JoeMorgue]

Frankly, I really don't understand... so many of the republican policies are disliked by people. So many people dislike Trump as a person... how can the polling results be as close as they are?

1. People lie to pollsters, or at the very least there are factors that make polling not a perfect representation of the US Population's opinion. If the Democrats desperately, I mean have to on a basic level, learn any lesson from '16 it's that. Maybe polling is just another thing that the post-truth world broke, maybe something else I don't know.

2. There people out there that don't vote based on policy. Enough to be a viable force in the electorate at least some of the time. They vote based on other factors. I've long argued that the Democrats are disliked far, far, far more than their policies are opposed.

3. People will forgive everything to get back at the other side. Right now the polarized tribalism is so bad 75% of each party would vote for a Deep Sea Angler Fish in an SS Uniform if they thought it would "tweak" the other side.

4. Not to keep going back to this well but (g)you have to take a step back and figure out if "So many people dislike Trump, so many people dislike Trump's policy, etc" is really "The algorithmic-ally perfect outrage bubble social media has me in is telling me everyone dislike's Trump."

 

[Delvo]

1. People lie to pollsters, or at the very least there are factors that make polling not a perfect representation of the US Population's opinion. If the Democrats desperately, I mean have to on a basic level, learn any lesson from '16 it's that. Maybe polling is just another thing that the post-truth world broke, maybe something else I don't know.

...

4. Not to keep going back to this well but (g)you have to take a step back and figure out if "So many people dislike Trump, so many people dislike Trump's policy, etc" is really "The algorithmic-ally perfect outrage bubble social media has me in is telling me everyone dislike's Trump."

The polls were right. Clinton was ahead where they said, Trump was ahead where they said, and it was essentially a tie where they said. The fact that Clinton and some Clinton supporters ignored the state-to-state distribution and trends (just like Trumpers now pretending there's any honest way to claim Trump isn't deeply, unprecedentedly unpopular) while others were warning of what the polls actually said doesn't change the fact that the polls were right and realistic observers drew the correct conclusions from them. There's no possible way to justify clinging to the myth of the inaccurate polls other than because they don't say what (formerly conservative) Republicans & Trumpers want them to say.

And holy wow, adding a superfluous apostrophe to a third-person-singular verb conjugation‽ I thought they were only inflicting that on non-possessive plural nouns!

 

[Mumbles]

And in other 'There is no voter suppression.' news, the town of Dodge City, KA, pop. 27,000 (60% Hispanic, which I'm sure is an unrelated detail ) has had it's single polling place moved outside of town, to a location which is more than a mile from the nearest bus stop.

More than 13,000 registered voters. One polling place. And I guess having it in town was too convenient.

To fully understand where we are:

when the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized, back in 2006 as I recall, it was after extensive review that found, among other issues, that those areas covered by preclearance were still attempting to suppress the votes of one group or other, usually black or Native American. This is no shock - an area need only not try any funny stuff for 10 years, and it can then apply to be removed from preclearance entirely - and some parts of Brooklyn, NY (yep, it had extended there as well - if you know New York's voting system you'll find this no shock) had done this. One of it's primary champions was republican Young Gun Eric Cantor.

Strangely, the Supreme Court's 2013 gutting of the VRA alleged that the law was based on decades-old data (at the time, the data, which was presented in court, was under 10 years old - and again, few areas had actually managed to be removed from preclearance between the most recent reauthorization and the decision). IOW, the Roberts court removed preclearance using a clear lie. No shock, then, that many areas begin moving immediately to suppress minority votes. Although in truth, Roberts was always an opponent of the VRA, going back to the 1980s.

 

[Mumbles]

I can support Trump having a long history of helping minorities

No you can't.

Not that it's all that important, given that the main point is to discuss GOP-aligned radio ads on "black" stations using over-the-top stereotypes...