• 0 Posts
  • 277 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle






  • From Healthcare.gov (the ACA, aka Obamacare, website):

    "Medicaid expansion & what it means for you. Some states have expanded their Medicaid programs to cover all people with household incomes below a certain level. Others haven’t. Whether you qualify for Medicaid coverage depends partly on whether your state has expanded its program.

    • In all states: You can qualify for Medicaid based on income, household size, disability, family status, and other factors. Eligibility rules differ between states.
    • In states that have expanded Medicaid coverage: You can qualify based on your income alone. If your household income is below 133% of the federal poverty level, you qualify. (Because of the way this is calculated, it turns out to be 138% of the federal poverty level. A few states use a different income limit.)

    …AND…

    “If your income is low and your state hasn’t expanded Medicaid: If your state hasn’t expanded Medicaid, your income is below the federal poverty level, and you don’t qualify for Medicaid under your state’s current rules, you won’t qualify for either health insurance savings program: Medicaid coverage or savings on a private health plan bought through the Marketplace.”

    source

    States were given money when the ACA was implemented to expand the Medicaid. Many red states turned that money down choosing to let their poor residents continue to not get any healthcare coverage. Was that your friend’s state?


  • Good. I didn’t need health insurance.

    No one needs healthcare insurance, until they get sick or hurt. Do you have some knowledge of immortality and invulnerability the rest of humanity isn’t aware of?

    The rest of ACA was fine. Don’t force your shit on me then make me pay for it if I’m not participating. I was poor as hell.

    If you were that poor the ACA would pay for your health insurance for you…unless you lived in a state that decided to reject the free money the Federal Government gave states to pay for poor people’s coverage. If thats your case, your issue is with your elected state government.





  • Quote from the article applied at the relevant point of the prayer.

    The Narcissist’s Prayer

    That didn’t happen. <— “The people that you see leaving? Because nobody ever leaves,”-Trump

    And if it did, it wasn’t that bad. <— “people were actually lining up in the back for photos since he couldn’t pose for pictures earlier.”-Trump

    And if it was, that’s not a big deal. <— “And when they do, I finish up quick.” -Trump

    And if it is, that’s not my fault. <— Trump then suggested that his staffers were to blame for the apparent departures

    And if it was, I didn’t mean it.

    And if I did, you deserved it.




  • Now you’re citing two laws instead of one with selective enforcement which is what we were talking about.

    Ok how about murder? Guy murders someone by hitting them when he is drunk. Rich guy with a good lawyer and connections in the community gets community service, but the poor,

    Murder is one law. Someone convicted of murder isn’t getting community service. Someone could have murdered someone and been charged with a lesser crime for whatever reason, but then they’d be getting community service for whatever that lesser charge was, not murder. So the law for murder in your example isn’t flawed.

    black man with a pot possession misdemeanor when he was 15 gets life in prison.

    Pot possession is a different law, and I don’t know any state in the union that will give you 15 years in prison for one. A quick google search says 180 days in jail is the max for most misdemeanors and I found one reference that says that in 24 states the max is 1 year in jail (still not prison).

    Your examples are getting farther from relevance not closer. I think we’ve reached the end of productive conversation with one another on this topic so I’ll bow out. Thank you for talking with me up to now. Have a great day!



  • Your example ignores the consequences to those accused and convicted which negates the value of using it as your argument.

    The worst someone will suffer from indiscriminate speed ticket enforcement will be a sub $500 fee.

    The worst someone will suffer from indiscriminate “illegal miscarriage” enforcement is prison, loss of livelihood, with the knock-on effect of death of the accused from trying to avoid being charged with the unjust law.

    There’s a drastic difference between those two examples, and trying to use the same brush to paint them the same is counterproductive, wouldn’t you agree?


  • I’ll jump on the fact checking train:

    Warner: Well, first of all, I get to say things as a journalist to set the record straight, so inflation is easing.

    Rep. Boebert: Oh, you’re going to fact check me during the interview?

    Warner: That’s exactly right, and inflation is easing.

    Rep. Boebert: Okay, this is adorable. Go to your local King Soopers or your City Market and ask the shoppers if inflation is down when they’re buying one dozen eggs for $7, $10,

    I don’t know Colorado specific geography well. I just went to the King Soopers web site and picked a random Denver location:

    Here is eggs for $3.09/dozen, so Boebert is wrong again.



  • But why? This is information that can most certainly be gleaned from just about any data broker.

    Obtaining the actual information is only part of the goal. The main reason is to create a perception in society that “you’ll be found out” which goes toward the goal of removing autonomy of women and turn them back into only ‘baby making machines’.

    If you want to see how this plays out, we have an example from history, specifically what Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu did in 1967 making abortion and contraception outlawed:

    From Wikipedia:

    To counter this sharp decline in the birth rate, the Communist Party decided that the country’s population should be increased from 20 million to 30 million inhabitants. In October 1966,[1][2] Decree 770 was personally sanctioned by Ceaușescu. Abortion and contraception[citation needed] were declared illegal, except for:

    • women over 45 (later lowered to 40, then raised again to 45).
    • women who had already borne four children (later raised to five).
    • women whose life would be threatened by carrying to term, due to medical complications.
    • women who were pregnant through rape and/or incest.

    Enforcement:

    To enforce the decree, society was strictly controlled. Contraceptives were removed from sale and all women were required to be monitored monthly by a gynecologist.[3]: 6  Any detected pregnancies were followed until birth. The secret police kept a close eye on hospital procedures.