SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the just-line-up-the-sights-on-your-toe-and-squeeeeeeze dept.
Here in the U.S., the presidential election season, like Christmas, seems to start earlier and earlier each time.
In keeping with this, the Democratic National Committee is making waves by announcing that it will exclude Fox News, which has the largest viewership of the major cable news networks by a considerable margin, from debate coverage of DNC presidential candidates.
Thomas Lifson outlines a number of reasons this may not be a good move.
One is that from a historical and strategy perspective:
Presidential debates inevitably favor the challengers. Trump can push them in that direction by agreeing to debates only if Fox News is included. That forces them to either accept FNC or have no debates at all. If they accept, that makes FNC the debate worth watching. The rest are discredited as Democrat "safe spaces,"
And it appears he has pounced and done exactly that from his twitter account:
Democrats just blocked @FoxNews from holding a debate. Good, then I think I’ll do the same thing with the Fake News Networks and the Radical Left Democrats in the General Election debates!
Really all either party has to do is A) not be crazy and/or B) keep their idiot mouths shut to win.
Neither of these seems to be in the cards dealt to either side, so it should be a heck of a ride.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 11 2019, @12:18PM (2 children)
You're giving him too much credit. He saved us from paying a triple tithe. We're still paying a tithe-and-a-half.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Tuesday March 12 2019, @08:00AM (1 child)
Well, by your math he actually saved you a tithe and a half.
Do USAians really pay up to 30% of their income for health insurance?
I can see someone paying medical expenses of that after you develop a serious problem and have a lot of out-of-pocket and incidental expenses, but here in Oz, for insurance we pay the medicare levy of 2%*. That covers all emergency, basic hospital, and fixed amounts for other services.
* It is 3% if you earn shitloads and don't have optional private insurance.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday March 12 2019, @01:42PM
Actually, I believe that many do.
Years ago, I supported my family on my own wages. There wasn't much left over, but I supported the family. We didn't carry decent insurance, because I couldn't afford it. All we had was some minimalistic POS policy the covered routine stuff.
When the youngest boy started school, the wife told me that she was tired of being trapped in the house, she was going to get a job. So - she took a temporary job at a manufacturer. She only planned to spend a few months, and "get ahead" a little bit. Well, the company had pretty good insurance, and she stayed for that, and maybe some other reasons. She opted for a few things on the policy that I never could have afforded on my own wages. And, it took every bit of half her pay. As time passed, her pay went up a little faster than the insurance premiums went up, and it dropped to about 1/3 of her pay.
Today, I'm paying for the insurance. When I started paying for it, it was a little less than 1/4 of my pay. Today, it's almost up to 1/3 of my pay.
All I can say is, "Thanks, Obama!"
It would be nice if someone did some surveys. Younger people who don't make what I make, probably are paying more than 1/2 of their paycheck to insure their families, and not getting as good insurance as I have.
I agree with all of those who say the insurance industry sucks. It's a damned shame that the crooked idiots decided Romney-care, Hillary-care, Obamacare was the way to go. They COULD HAVE done something useful with insurance. Instead, they all took a payoff from the insurance lobby, and screwed over the American worker.