a new party

[MaryAnne11]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know fuck it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird fucking world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

As a moderate Liberal I disagree with much of the far left.

 

[Mac1958]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know fuck it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird fucking world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

As a moderate Liberal I disagree with much of the far left.

Nice to have someone in my little corner of this board.

Unfortunately, the Trumpsters aren't going to understand this, and I mean that literally. If you lean even slightly to the Left, they are fully convinced that your goal is full, pure, actual, 100% communism. And there's no talking them out of it. Personally, I've long since given up trying.

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

 

[MaryAnne11]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know fuck it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird fucking world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

As a moderate Liberal I disagree with much of the far left.

Nice to have someone in my little corner of this board.

Unfortunately, the Trumpsters aren't going to understand this, and I mean that literally. If you lean even slightly to the Left, they are fully convinced that your goal is full, pure, actual, 100% communism. And there's no talking them out of it. Personally, I've long since given up trying.

I am quite used to discussing the pros and cons. You can sort out the reasonable pretty fast.

As we enter A New Year I would like to move on but often fail. Trying to give credit to those who may have changed.

Even McConnell backtracked yesterdays emphatic no to a stimulus package, suggested a smaller one now, larger one in the new Congress.

Biden and McConnell are old friends. He told Mitch he would like to work with him but he would go around him if he had to. Many Senators are tired of the stand off, are working together.

We shall see but are far from alone.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

 

[HappyJoy]

I think to become a more perfect union. There are always problems to fix.

And what does that mean? A more perfect union to me is not spending us into oblivion. People are wanting to go trillions more in debt, we don’t have the money and no means to pay. You can tax every American 100% of our income and still not reduce the debt. We are on the edge of disaster. We need to take a hard look at our spending and cut it, drastically.

Trump was spending us into oblivion while the economy was doing fine. Glad you were concerned about it after all.

The rest of your post isn't worth bothering with since nobody is being taxed at 100% nor is anyo.....ya' know fuck it, it's not even worth finishing the sentence.

You asked what 'moving forward' was and I gave you an answer, building a more perfect union. It's all gooey in founding father glory so you should pretend to like it.

Who is going to force entertainers worth 10s of millions to join the working class in this perfect Union?
The average person working on a movie makes about 15K/year.

You continue to go off into the weeds. We need some fairness in both wages and taxes.

I think he thinks he's debating Stalin or whatever.

Just telling the truth about part of the Liberal Elite.
They don’t give a shit about you.

I see. So according to your analogy (I don't know what else to call it) I am an entertainer "worth 10s of millions" and the left doesn't give a shit about me because they are going to force me to only make $15k?

It's a weird fucking world, isn't it?

You think a celebrity is going to pay you an equal salary or stay in the US if they have to pay an exorbitant amount of taxes.

Oh, so I'm not the celebrity now and the problem is you think liberal policies are going to push specifically celebrities to leave the country?

Seriously, this is a dumb argument.

So what do you think of the dozens of celebrities who promised they would leave the US in 2016?

I don't?

I thought you said they would leave if Biden was elected and the wage matching down to $15k or whatever.

Stop being stupid.
Over 100 celebrities said they would leave the US if Trump won in 2016.
As usual, they lied.
Of course you know this but you’ll lie that you don’t.

I don’t care, do you?

Simply because the Liberals here have a habit of using these celebrities to display that cool celebrities hate Trump.
Anyone who constantly breaks an oath is not cool.

I do?

Are you not a LibBot?
You love everybody who thinks exactly the same way you do.
I certainly don't see any Liberals here, or anywhere else for that matter, differing on any issue.
You come across as robots and then call those who disagree with you on any issue a TrumpBot.

As a moderate Liberal I disagree with much of the far left.

And I as probably being more liberal than you don't find you to be an enemy of the state or whatever cracked out views the wingnuts have for anyone not in pure agreement with them.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

No, not everyone. Just those who are not willing to think and be willing to move on.

Health,Education and fairness are important to all. I posted yesterday the Constitution has been amended 27 times. Those who signed that Constitution were humans who lived centuries ago. They would have no conception of the world today.

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

There are pros and cons on raising the age. Many workers need it, others who do not do hard labor do not. We do need to increase the funding to higher brackets. Of course that will upset many.

We are in a place right now where many are losing jobs and health care in the 50 to 65 bracket. Not just blue collar, but white,too. They can not afford the high cost of health care. We need a standardized system instead of the hodgepodge we have today.

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

No, not everyone. Just those who are not willing to think and be willing to move on.

Health,Education and fairness are important to all. I posted yesterday the Constitution has been amended 27 times. Those who signed that Constitution were humans who lived centuries ago. They would have no conception of the world today.

Logically, you'd be right of course. We're not a logical people or perhaps more precisely, we're no longer adults. The "Sensible center of the American political spectrum" (as Colin Powell described it) is a no-fly zone.

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

There are pros and cons on raising the age. Many workers need it, others who do not do hard labor do not. We do need to increase the funding to higher brackets. Of course that will upset many.

We are in a place right now where many are losing jobs and health care in the 50 to 65 bracket. Not just blue collar, but white,too. They can not afford the high cost of health care. We need a standardized system instead of the hodgepodge we have today.

Yeah, I agree, I don't think we consider the consequences, not everyone is living that much longer, especially poorer people. So by raising the age you tend to put more of the tax burden on people who will never realize the benefits upon retirement. With that said the program needs to remain solvent. Not an easy fix but the very last thing we should ever do is cut FICA.

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans. Also, nobody is forcing anyone into retirement, if they want to continue to work they can and defer SS to a later date.

SS was created to keep the elderly poor out of poverty and for the most part it has done that. However now with the living age gap between the wealthy and poor spreading social security as it is now is looking more like a regressive tax and raising the age for everyone would just increase that gap. I wouldn't mind seeing the age raised on the wealthy while allowing poorer Americans to receive benefits sooner if they so choose.

But again, what do Republicans want to do? Raise the age AND cut payroll taxes. Who does that really help other than those who want to kill SS?

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

 

[HappyJoy]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

 

[candycorn]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.

 

[MaryAnne11]

You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.

I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.

That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.

I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?

everyone....

Republicans.

Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.

I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.

And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.

Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.

This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.

Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.

Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.

The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.

I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.

Medicare has a 3% overhead. Some version could be tied between Medicare and private. People think Medicare is free until they sign up before they are eligible for Social Security, much cheaper than private Insurance but still out of pocket.

There is much to be worked out, but yes I think Company Insurance will be phased out if we have some courageous Politicians.