READER COMMENTS ON
"Cruz' Speech Writer Complains She Doesn't Know How She'll Get Health Care Come January"
(15 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
...
kd5
said on 10/15/2013 @ 4:46 pm PT...
I take no schadenfreude for someone with health care uncertainty, but one must appreciate the irony...
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
...
Comrade Misfit
said on 10/15/2013 @ 5:19 pm PT...
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
...
Ska-T
said on 10/15/2013 @ 6:49 pm PT...
When your core beliefs or your paycheck depend on your denial of reality, then eventually you crash into contradiction. If you are a typical partisan, you're not aware of the impact, you don't learn anything, and you don't change.
But the open-minded can still have a good laugh. Too bad they are a vanishing breed (due to propaganda, distraction, and hardship).
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
...
KarenJ
said on 10/15/2013 @ 6:58 pm PT...
I've had Twitter exchanges* with Amanda Carpenter, and I'd say "stupid" describes her best. She's not exactly got an open mind.
*(like a lot of rigid ideologues on Twitter, her way of getting out of a back & forth discussion was to nick me as a spammer and I very briefly got suspended)
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
...
MLR
said on 10/15/2013 @ 7:56 pm PT...
She's as stupid & selfish as that creep Cruz and backwards as the ideology she & her lying boss advocate. The public option would have alleviated much of the discourse over healthcare in this country.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
...
E.R. White
said on 10/16/2013 @ 7:50 am PT...
As we say, in Texas, to be kind to people who may be "intellectually challenged".
Bless Her Little Heart.
Sometimes we add: "Who cares?"
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
...
Ernest A. Canning
said on 10/16/2013 @ 7:59 am PT...
If you think Amanda Carpenter is both tone deaf and hypocritical, consider this little segment from today's Los Angeles Times column by Michael Hiltzik entitled "Does Congress deserve a raise?", which, curiously, does not appear in the paper's on-line version.
You can thank tin-eared representatives like Phil Gingry (R-GA), who complained at a party caucus that his staffers can hop to a lobbying job and make $500,000. "Meanwhile I'm stuck here making $172,000 a year." (Actually, $174,000).
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
...
Jesús B Ochoa Jr
said on 10/16/2013 @ 9:14 am PT...
she should try relocating to cuba -
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
...
Sue Wilson
said on 10/16/2013 @ 2:01 pm PT...
I called my Rep. Tom McClintock. His aide told me her husband is self-employed, and she went to work for government so she could get health insurance. She told me that I had chosen to be self-employed. I told her that not everyone can work for government!
I'm finding a lot of smug government workers these days who can't figure out that I am paying for their paycheck, so why should I have to pay five to ten times what they do for health coverage?
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
...
karen
said on 10/16/2013 @ 2:56 pm PT...
hey, if you live in a red state that didn't do their own state exchange, I'd be concerned about the federally run state exchanges, apparently they enrollment process to the private insurers is messed up...I think its a good thing congressional staffers will have to use exchanges, hopefully means they will get fixed quicker..
but I do hate people who try to detroy govt, do nothing to contribute to it complaining when some aspect govt isn't working perfectly...put up or shut up
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
...
SH
said on 10/17/2013 @ 11:46 am PT...
Dumb or not, this hypocritical scumbag is coping with the reality that many are discovering as they begin to crunch the numbers on the ACA.
A quick ACA calculation on the Kaiser Family Foundation site shows that a family of 2 making 100k/year in California (Placer County) would owe over 5,542/year each for healthcare. That is under the Bronze plan, which would only cover 60% of costs and the rest is out-of-pocket (which doesn't include the 5k premium). It is over 7,447 for the silver plan. And you aren't entitled to tax credits unless you make less than 400% of the Fed poverty line
This whole program is a joke. I am 100% in agreement that everyone should have healthcare, I just don't understand why anyone would support this plan, especially the part that forces you, at the threat of thousands of dollars in fines to buy insurance. Why the fuck is this so expensive for people? Why can't we just have universal healthcare funded in a responsible way?
Politics/Republicans? This is a great bullshit excuse for the one-party system to pretend to try to represent people while horrible policies get implemented under the guise of compromise. Not like politics matters anyway, who knows to what extent the election system is totally compromised and how many politicians are now in office who didn't actually get the majority of the vote. I'm sure this will be getting worse over the years, if the reporting on this site is any indication.
Barring truly universal humane health coverage, how about laws regulating the cost of medical procedures and drugs so that insurance would be more affordable? Then a modest program to subsidize premiums for those who really can't afford insurance but don't qualify for medicare. Then increase medicare payments to doctors so that more doctors will accept medicare patients. How about making these things part of the effing ACA in the first place so it would live up to its name?
All of this could be funded with decreases in the defense budget, a 1% (or some tiny amount) financial transactions tax ("Wall Street Tax"), increased capital gains and corporate taxes, among other things.
There are a million other ways that creative thinkers really looking to help the most amount of people possible with hurting the least amount of people possible.
How are you supposed to get ahead in life unless you are making at least 80-100k for each adult household member? How can you put money away for kid's college or emergencies, buy a home, start a business, eat high quality organic foods (i.e. stay healthy instead of eating the toxic shit most of our food supply has become), go on a vacation every couple of years? What can you accomplish when you owe 10k + per year, not to mention the 30-35% you are paying in Federal and State income taxes. So after all is said and done, around 45% of income is gone off the top. That's socialist Euro status, and they get WAY better benefits than you or I under the ACA. Then you have to pay student loans, credit card debts racked up during the hard times before getting a decent job, rent, utilities, car costs, food, etc.
I don't know what the average Bradblog reader makes in a year, but I think you would agree that a 50,000 salary does not a rich man make. After all income taxes are counted, and FICA taxes, you would walk away with roughly 30k for the year in a city like NYC. Add ACA costs and you are taking home 24,500. That is 50% of your salary to taxes and health insurance, which we can now officially consider a tax since you have no choice in the matter.
I hope this all doesn't come off as callous, but I don't understand a political system that bails out banks to the tune of trillions and allows there executives to keep tens of millions in bonuses nonetheless, but which isn't increasing SS benefits or providing universal healthcare. At the same time, the system is enormously draining on people above the poverty line but still living paycheck to paycheck. The only part of taxes that I feel good about paying is SS and Medicare, because I know exactly what they are going for and those purposes are both practical and humane. I would gladly pay another thousand or fifteen hundred a year towards medicare, expand the rolls and increase quality of service available to medicare recipients, and scrap the ACA entirely.
But I guess nothing better could possibly have come out of a bill that basically no one who voted on it read in its entirety, whose final draft was provided six hours before the vote.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
...
john wiggs
said on 10/17/2013 @ 1:23 pm PT...
is it just me or does ted cruz look alot like joe mcarthy? hmmm?
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
...
RJK
said on 10/17/2013 @ 4:14 pm PT...
SH, that's about $650 per month for two people. I'm not sure what you're used to paying, but that's not that bad at all. My spouse and I, after my employer contribution, would actually pay about $200 more per month than that (if he were on my plan).
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
...
SH
said on 10/18/2013 @ 4:47 am PT...
I am used to not buying any health insurance. However I am lucky recently to have insurance through my wife's company which costs 300 for two and completely covers all doctor visits except 20 dollars copay. I don't have to pay 40% of each service out of pocket and it is half the cost to us. If some relatively small NY based posthouse can pull this off why cant the entire fed govt give us this kind of deal? ACA is not a good deal. Two healthy people should not be forced to spend 650 per month on health insurance. Or lower our tax burden proportionally. So yeah I could probably swing it but I would have almost no money left over each month and shitty health insurance. How is that a good deal? The only way it is a good deal is if you hapoily accept the medical industry and insurance industry screwing us over big time. In that case, ignoring any thing else the gov't could have done to control the crazy costs, ACA doesn't look horrible.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
...
SH
said on 10/18/2013 @ 4:56 am PT...
Checked the math. At 5500 each per year 2 people would owe around 950 per month.