Posted by Guest (Post 1494772)

It's always such a good idea to start a discussion with this statement.

It will help to solve so many problems.

Posted by Guest (Post 1494803)

Hey, I have little doubt the republicans will treat me well financially. If you want to think they are going to look after the lee well off I don't think I can change your opinions, but I would suggest you limber up and practice grabbing your ankles. It's coming.

Posted by Guest (Post 1494734)

You are a fvcking idiot...

If a person has income and they go to the hospital, THEY are on the hook for the hospitals bill. If they refuse to pay, the hospital will send it to collection and could pursue a court judgement to lien their assets to satisfy the bill. Just because a person does not want to pay for something, does not mean the government steps in and pays the bill - that would be ideal in a liberals world.

"Everybody else who uses the hospital" does not pay anyone else's bill. Most people have insurance, all insurance companies (including Obammacare, Medicaid, and medicare) have a pre negotiated rate per code (every illness or service required has a code assigned to it for billing purposes). People that have insurance would only be required to pay the deductible, if they have one. People that do not have insurance and have income or resources to pay the bill, are charged at full rate (not the cheaper pre negotiated rate the insurance companies have)...

FYI - The person that has income most likely pays property tax and a portion of that is going to fire / paramedic services. If they ride in the ambulance to the hospital they will in most cases receive a bill for that transport...even though the equipment and personnel were funded by their property tax money.

What working people get subsidized care funded by seniors?

You should stick to something your qualified at, like cleaning the house!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

Posted by Guest

There are three different ways to look at the debt increase during an administration and depending who's side you're on you'll either look at the most favorable or the most unfavorable. Like I said, even though we give the president blame or credit, debt comes from Congress spending more than they take in.

On January 20, 2009, when President Obama was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion. That's almost double.

That is very simply how much the debt rose during the Obama administration. How much of that he was responsible for is a matter of discussion. Even though Congress is responsible for all of the spending the president still to sign the bills. Now a lot of different factors come into play here. Does the same party hold the Congress and the White House? Were bills passed with a clear veto-proof majority?

You can make numbers look like whatever you want, but the fact is that the debt grew almost as much in the eight years of the Obama presidency than it did for the previous two hundred and forty years of the nation.

Posted by Guest

Debt is not a stand alone number. You have to look at it in relation to GDP i.e. the size of the economy, and whether there were major catastrophes, recession, war, etc. Two companies could each have debt of $100. If one country earns $1 million, the debt of $100 is nothing. If the other country earns $200, the $100 debt is a big deal. The President does not have control over all the debt. For example, Obama inherited war costs from Bush that went on for years. And an obstructionist republican congress didn't help either. Obama wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy which Congress wouldn't enact, which would have reduced the deficit. Nor did a recession help, the biggest one since the great Depression. That was huge - the recession caused a massive decline in government revenues, and that started a year before Obama took office. And of course, the recession caused extra expenditures such as unemployment insurance. And comparing debt from 240 years ago is not comparing apples with oranges, due to inflation. Lastly, had there not been a burst of spending under Bush, the budget surplus would have been available to help out during the recession. Instead, Bush used it to pay for the unpopular war. Remember "weapons of mass destruction"?

Posted by Guest (Post 1494865)

You know Dirt, you need to work on your greetings and salutations. Obamacare is not an insurance company....no pay or slow pay raises healthcare costs. They get passed along to those who pay.

Posted by Guest

And if you add a third company that earns $75...that $100 debt is an even bigger deal. That 3rd company is the US.

We owe over $20 trillion...we spend over $4 trillion...but our income is less than $3 trillion. We're bankrupt.

November spending:

Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus/Deficit for November 2017

Total Outlays $347 Billion $4,164,000,000,000 ($4.2 trillion) for the year
Total Receipts $208 Billion $2,496,000,000,000 ($2.5 trillion) for the year
Deficit $139 Billion That's $1,668,000,000,000 ($1.6 trillion) for the year.

We borrowed 40% of what we spent. How long do you think that will last?

Monthly Treasury Statement

Posted by Guest

Don Baldwin, why don't you just crawl back into your little hole. It must be difficult, being the kid on the block that everyone hated.

Posted by Guest

The wife asked me last month how I could be so stupid. I asked if after 39 years she just now catching on who is the slow one.

Posted by Guest

Yes without insurance you are on the hook but when you owe a million dollars the answer is called bankruptcy. Medical debt is the leading reason for bankruptcy. The loss does not go to the federal budget but it goes to everybody else who uses the hospital.

Posted by Guest

You pay for medicare you are paying for those who would rather buy a new boat over paying for health insurance. You need insurance ro drive a car why shouldn't you have to be financially responsible regarding health care.

Posted by Guest

The reason republicans tell you Obamacare is so terrible is they don't want to pay the Obama care surcharge. I know I pay it. That's what they are really trying to eliminate. I am pretty slow if there is a fault in my logic I'm listening.

Posted by Guest (Post 1494885)

Debt is not a stand alone number. You have to look at it in relation to GDP i.e. the size of the economy, and whether there were major catastrophes, recession, war, etc. Two companies could each have debt of $100. If one country earns $1 million, the debt of $100 is nothing. If the other country earns $200, the $100 debt is a big deal. The President does not have control over all the debt. For example, Obama inherited war costs from Bush that went on for years. And an obstructionist republican congress didn't help either. Obama wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy which Congress wouldn't enact, which would have reduced the deficit. Nor did a recession help, the biggest one since the great Depression. That was huge - the recession caused a massive decline in government revenues, and that started a year before Obama took office. And of course, the recession caused extra expenditures such as unemployment insurance. And comparing debt from 240 years ago is not comparing apples with oranges, due to inflation. Lastly, had there not been a burst of spending under Bush, the budget surplus would have been available to help out during the recession. Instead, Bush used it to pay for the unpopular war. Remember "weapons of mass destruction"?

Posted by Guest

Posted by Guest

You are so special, you have been calling your wife stupid for the last 39 years and just now she is questioning who is stupid. So, are you saying she is so dumb that she did not know you were dumber OR are you saying she was so dumb she started to think you are dumb?...Lets see if the liberals on here attack you for that sexist statement...don't worry they aren't bright enough to understand it...


The biggest reason for bankruptcy is poor management of finances and a risk tolerance that does not correlate with their earning ability. And NO the debt is not passed on to everyone that uses the hospital, only those that do not have coverage (the ones that do have insurance have pre negotiated rates).

Please expand on the claim that Medicare rates are paying for someone's healthcare that does not have insurance...The difference between the requirement to have auto insurance is because when you are in an accident, other peoples property (cars, homes, etc) could be damaged, other people could end up with injuries as a result of the accident...healthcare coverage only covers the person that took it out, and if someone has gallbladder stones other people are at no risk of injury due to this illness.


The reason this Republican tells you Obammacare sucks is; I am 54 year old male with no health issues and my healthcare went from $750 a month to $1350 a month over the last 3 years. The reason is; I now am paying more for some other unknown person, who does not make enough money to afford healthcare themselves (like the wackadoodle that has been unemployed for the last 18 years)...

And no, you are not listening...

Posted by Guest

:1rotfl:


As if you know. :oops:

And before you start showing your ignorance further, the IRS audit is simply looking to ensure that the numbers are being put in the right boxes...NOT how much debt he has or where he received the money from.

I realize that you're one of the dumbest Trump cultists on here (albeit, it's a close contest :D), but even you should know there's a reason...Trump is petrified to let anyone see his tax returns.

I personally think it's because Putin loaned him a massive amount of money to keep him out of bankruptcy and that Chump has yet to pay it back...which is why Trump acts like Putin's little bitch. :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Posted by Guest

Yes you have a pre negotiated rate but that is going to include something which covers the cost of treating non paying patients. Think about it, every business has customers who do not pay, you need to set your rate so overall you still make money. Pre negotiated rates/medicare reimbursement rates include something to cover these losses. The only way to reduce rates is to not treat people without insurance or get money from somewhere to insurance companies or hospitals. When they eliminate the Obama care surcharge that will be less money going into health care. The only reason we have medicare is insurance companies realized it was too expensive to cover old people and make money so the government was forced to take over. Now tell me what idea the republicans have to make health care cheaper. Donald is going to make a deal and everything will be better?

Posted by Guest (Post 1495631)

Yes you have a pre negotiated rate but that is going to include something which covers the cost of treating non paying patients. Think about it, every business has customers who do not pay, you need to set your rate so overall you still make money. Pre negotiated rates/medicare reimbursement rates include something to cover these losses. The only way to reduce rates is to not treat people without insurance or get money from somewhere to insurance companies or hospitals. When they eliminate the Obama care surcharge that will be less money going into health care. The only reason we have medicare is insurance companies realized it was too expensive to cover old people and make money so the government was forced to take over. Now tell me what idea the republicans have to make health care cheaper. Donald is going to make a deal and everything will be better?