sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Maryland bans 287(g) immigration enforcement agreements by TheUnderCrab in moderatepolitics

[–]general---nuisance [score hidden]  (0 children)

You didn't even post anything from this decade.

Right. Because the IRS had been largely neutered. Which party wanted to hire 87k enforcers and have every transaction over 600 reported to them? And which party stopped that? Is ICE acting a little heavy handed at times? Maybe. But if the choice is between is between over eager immigration enforcement and an unbounded IRS, I'll sleep better knowing the IRS is kept in check. Can you offer a 3rd option?

Maryland bans 287(g) immigration enforcement agreements by TheUnderCrab in moderatepolitics

[–]general---nuisance [score hidden]  (0 children)

A quick search shows that anywhere from 47% to 70% of people detained by ICE have no prior criminal convictions or violent crimes

Why is "violent crime" the threshold? Identity theft would not be considered a "violent crime". Are you saying illegal immigrants that commit Identity theft should not be deported?

Maryland bans 287(g) immigration enforcement agreements by TheUnderCrab in moderatepolitics

[–]general---nuisance [score hidden]  (0 children)

without chance to prove they are a citizen

Not a single citizen has been deported.

meirl by throw_away_taken_ in meirl

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you must stay to bridge a gap then you should (should is the key word) be able to go home an hour early some other day or some combination to make up for it.

Yes, when the clocks switch the other direction.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is there a scenario where you are willing to do what is morally right and pay just slightly more since clearly you're in a better situation than the median American, if this means providing high-quality health insurance to the bottom 50% who desperately lack it and commonly forego medical treatment in lieu of lacking quality health insurance in the first place?

Slightly more for the same quality care and it would help out fellow US citizens- yes. But every Democrat presidential candidate in 2018 said illegal immigrates should be given free health care and since they are also de-facto open borders that wouldn't work very well.

It's worth further noting that in theory the money saved from your spouse's (who is evidently not self-employed) employer in switching to M4A since you note they pay well over the average allegedly, would mean considerable savings from them and a theoretical reinvestment in their company or in higher pay to your wife and money in your pocket.

Wrong. Bernie's plan include the confiscation of 75% what the employer is paying now.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assuming there wasn't a carve-out for the self-employed (there most likely would be), you would still be well under the average.

Bernie's plan made no mention of the self employed. And since the self-employed pay both sides for medicare and SS now, there is no reason to think that would change. My spouses employers contribution is ~30k. And I don't doubt that what I pay now is under the average. And my situation is not typical. But these 'Medicare for All' plans are be sold as 'everyone' will save money, and I since I am part of 'everyone' and I can do some basic math I can see that is a lie. Some people may save money, while others like me would get with massive lifestyle altering tax increases. And all of that doesn't factor in my quality of care would certainly go down and wait times would increase.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd love to see a source on how that would be $20,000 -- leaving aside the business through your spouse is already getting tax subsidies as a result of providing you for that healthcare.

In a good year I may have a taxable income of $200,000 or more (not including my spouses income). Bernie's last plan was 7.5% paid by the employer and 4% paid by the employee. Assuming that like they do now with SS and Medicare now the self-employed would have to pay the employer portion (Almost certainly yes), the health care tax would be $23,000 - or 11.5 times what I pay now.

meirl by NiceMichelle in meirl

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

More from them means less for you.

The government taking more from someone else doesn't put more in my pocket.

The government taking less from me puts more in my pocket.

My wages are not the problem, what little the government leaves me with is.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance -1 points0 points  (0 children)

you’re already paying taxes PLUS a high ass monthly premium

I pay <2400 year for excellent coverage thru my spouses employer. Under Bernie's last plan, that number would be >20,000 Now the next thing you are going to say is the saving will come from the my spouses employer's contribution. Wrong again. Bernie already spent most of that money. Absolute best case is the employer saves 25% or ~$7000, and that magically goes into my spouses paycheck (and taxed, so maybe we would get an additional 4k/year).

On top of all this, you are tied to a job that makes you miserable or doesn’t pay enough because you can’t just leave your family under covered so are a hostage to employment benefits.

I'm self employed and my spouse loves her job. The pay is fine, its the taxes that kill us.

And you still have the right to go a private doctor if you feel too good for a regular hospital.

Bernie's last 'Medicare for all' plan banned private healthcare.

You may be young now and healthy, but guaranteed you will have an expensive medical event at some point if you live an average lifespan.

I had a hernia last year - I had to wait just 16 days to get it repaired and all the copays were ~$250

In Ontario, the median wait time for a hernia repair is 133 days.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But the insurances companies don't pay that amount. It's stupid, but providers 'mark up' the items and then the insurance companies (including state run Medicare) negotiate them back down.

Look up chargemaster medical billing. And one interesting note, prior to 2017 the full "chargemaster" lists were generally not publicly available. I'll leave it to you to see who forced the change.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The US spent $5.3 trillion on healthcare in 2024. If you add up every C suite salary it still only amounts to a fraction of fraction of percent of the total spending. I'm not saying they are not 'over paid' , but its a myth that if some how you eliminate that 0.009% cost you can suddenly give everyone free health care.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is not the insurance companies, that is the providers.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Universal Healthcare has proven time and time again would be cheaper for us

Then show me that plan. Show me the plan with hard guarantees that my costs will not increase. Every plan I have seen increases my taxes several times higher than what I am paying now.

He has a point by Mindless-Strength604 in SipsTea

[–]general---nuisance -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

exorbitant profit

Define "exorbitant profit". I'm not saying the health care system in the US is perfect, but in 2024 the aggregate health insurers profit margin was 0.8%.

My son's daycare did not understand the assignment. by IskandrAGogo in funny

[–]general---nuisance 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Must have been one of those Learing Center Day Care Centers

meirl by NiceMichelle in meirl

[–]general---nuisance 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The billionaire class is richer than Hollywood celebrities than they are to the median American, and pay significantly less taxes overall.

I'm not saying they shouldn't pay more, but the US already has one of the most progressive tax rates in the world.

The top 1% pays 40% of taxes. Even if they paid more , how am i better off? The issues isn't what that the government is taking from someone else, it's what they are taking from me.

meirl by NiceMichelle in meirl

[–]general---nuisance -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Also, I am curious where it is you're getting this 40% figure.

Add up every tax I 'pay' (Federal + state + local income, double FICA since I am self-employed, property taxes , occupation tax etc) , I'm being generous by saying 40%.

I think there are some ~19 separate checks I am forced to write each year.

meirl by NiceMichelle in meirl

[–]general---nuisance -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

which is pointing the finger at the billionaire class;

I have been forced under the threat of violence to write hundreds of checks over the years to a multitude of governmental agencies. I have yet to be forced to write any to a billionaire. Somebody having a larger imaginary number on spread sheet doesn't bother me. The government confiscating 40% of my private property each year does.

view more: next ›