additional Tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations bring about deficits, debt, asset bubbles and busts and offshore investing. I've seen this movie over and over again for the last 45 years.
Some Republicans legislators do need to change and eventually WILL, as things will be so bad at home that they will feel forced. Look at the number already refusing to do Town Halls. They are VERY aware more people will soon be more "ticked off" than they are now. Some sociology and marketing classes cover research going back to the 1950s on "innovations". People adopt new ideas in sets, not all at once, first a few, then more and more.
The research jargon--"Early innovators" adopt first, as high in need and high in resources, such as having more spare time and cash. "Late innovators" go next as need to plan a bit first and save up a bit. Then comes "early majority", can't afford a big mistake, testing the waters by asking innovating neighbors how their new ideas worked out. That's where we are now, the first 50%. You are here, if you are in any of those three sets.
The lagging 50% delay more. It's harder for them to get the resources together, plus they don't want to upset the crankier neighbors who "keep bugging them" about this and that.
The most ready among them are the "late majority". That's who we are trying to persuade now. We get to a voting majority, we don't need more. Very last to adopt or not at all will be the "laggards" and the "never adopting". However, we don't need to reach 70% to win elections.
That means we do not NEED to shift the MAGA extremists, only some of their neighbors. We merely make it obvious to enough neighbors that following their local MAGA bullies is not smart.
We can listen to these podcasts and walk away with things to say.
AN EXAMPLE-- The early research on innovators was done on farmers. It took some places 30 years to switch most farmers, not just the innovators, from horse-and-plow set-ups, to tractors. We are in modern times and can get a 50% voting majority in far less time, due to the internet. You HAVE to have some patience, You HAVE to know how to convince some people, not everybody, just enough people, not many, as Trump DID NOT HAVE 50% behind him when he won. (We all feel angry, yes. It's hard for me to "put a lid" on my "boiling-over pot" of anger. I remind myself that: Anger leads to nastiness. Nastiness is a turn-off, generally shown to cause resistance. Yes, resistance. They might "say yes to your face" to get you to stop. But then they vote the opposite when the curtain is pulled and you can't see them.)
In a nutshell - the richest don't care . And our leaders are of the richest - so they won't do what is right for the old and the sick.
As I understand it; there are laws that prohibit Congress from giving themselves better health and retirement benefits - but they break the laws and their oaths regularly - look at how Congress changed the laws so they could steal over a billion from PPP. Even more unfair is how the fed and state employees get so much more in retirement benefits than the workers in social security that have supported them - as the fed worker works far fewer years. Why is any fed employee getting more than the average income of a family of 4 in the fed retirement system - they don't have to save for retirement -not fair. Maybe everyone should be in social security - Congress, generals, presidents, police.
The health and standard of living should be a concern of our leaders. Our country has the highest bankruptcy do to health costs. And creating wealth through tax rates on the rich ( to pass wealth on to the next generation) is not the way to create a healthy country. As a CPA - I am disgusted with the estate tax exemption too.
Shifting responsibility to the states hurts red states more than blue states. I guess all of the sick and hungry are in their current state because they’re lazy or don’t pray enough
The goal of DOGE is to reduce government waste, but they aren't going to even consider the biggest way to save money in the healthcare system. If the US went to a single payer healthcare system paid for by taxes (and much of the current system is paid for by taxes) it would save about $2.5T a year. That is more than DOGE purports to save over 10 years. Why isn't DOGE recommending this clear saving? It's because if implemented many of Republicans donors in the private system would be out of a job. This would also get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, VA Healthcare, Prison healthcare and many others. Other western countries spend about half what the US does per person and they cover everyone. Think what the US could save with it's economies of scale. Think of all the eliminated medical bankruptcies.
The goal of the administration may be to hand out tax breaks, but we fail to consider the long term, underlying effect. None of the forces driving the direction of the country, at present, explicitly state the deeper desire. As a combined group the era they see as the time when America was great, is the 19th century. The Trump stool (pun intended) rests on three legs. The MAGA base's will to force, the tecno-bros' neo-feudalism, and the white Christian nationalist's theocracy. The combined effect will be an impoverished America not only internally, but also our international standing.
The midterm elections are eighteen months away and the presidential election almost four years. Do you really think these people are going to say, "We gave it our best shot, but now it's time to step aside and let the demon rats undo what we're accomplished."? I have no idea how this gets stopped, but unless we can find a way, we're headed to becoming Hungary, Russia or the DPRK where you never expect the government to do anything for you.
Here's a side note to consider. Internal Russian documents show that the Russia's goal in intervening in the Syrian civil war was not to assist al-Assad. It was to drive a foreign non-white/non-Christian population out of the middle east and cause Europe to destabilize.
“Plenty of able-bodied Americans can’t get health insurance because their low-wage jobs don’t offer coverage and because they can’t afford to buy insurance on their own.“ My workplace offers an insurance plan, but I (and many of my coworkers) cannot afford to be on it. It is simply too much out of each paycheck, and while health insurance is important, I can’t eat or pay rent with it. We are offered free life insurance coverage, though, because apparently it’s cheaper if we just all die rather than be offered affordable medical coverage.
"What’s clearer is that checking people for eligibility more frequently creates extra work for both states and individual beneficiaries. Experience has shown—repeatedly—that the end result is people losing their Medicaid, even when they are still eligible, because of bureaucratic breakdowns and complex paperwork."
Republicans: "We will end waste in Medicaid by introducing... [check notes] MORE WASTE!!"
Brilliant idea, let's make recipients acquire documents from employers, fill out paperwork, give it to health care providers to check and verify, have someone up the chain in a state office track, check and verify, send that into to some federal office to track, check and verify with a chance to cut them off at every level to rid the system of waste. Because paperwork = better health.
People who qualify for Medicaid often have variable incomes. They pick up a shift here and there, maybe work a temporary job for a few weeks or months, raising their income slightly above the threshold, but then they fall back down again. There's no way this small, temporary increase can cover medical bills or medication, especially at "uninsured" rates. Republicans argue that programs like Medicaid trap people in dependence and poverty. In fact, setting up the system to remove benefits as soon as someone briefly crosses a hard ceiling for eligibility discourages them from working those extra shifts just to remain eligible. "I can't take that shift or I'll lose my Medicaid and my kid won't get their medicine."
Of course we know the goal for Republicans is to erect barriers to federal assistance for the poor. That way, they can pretend to afford tax cuts that will let Elon pay off yet another woman to have yet another kid...
please cut the money flowing to your locals, please please please please i'm begging u to eff this up big time. the job so in this area has been good -- B+. but u can do even better. do not read this then, go about your normal biz of screwing your base and everyone else so rich guys that fund your campaigns keeping ensconced in your bs legislative job for self enrichment continues. this is not a warning. ignore it completely. it's joe biden writing it and kamala told me what to write. i'm also a communist and read about karl marx ... once.
In red states like my own Florida there’s no way the Rs would increase state funding for Medicaid or any other safety net program. Our electeds do not actually care about us. They act in lockstep with their party. They do not act in accordance with the needs of the state’s citizens.
Appreciate the clarity of this. Healthcare financing has become so damned complicated that it might, someday, force the system to some kind of single payer. It's all Ptolemaic epicycles ...
additional Tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations bring about deficits, debt, asset bubbles and busts and offshore investing. I've seen this movie over and over again for the last 45 years.
Didn’t Desantis steal $10 million from Medicaid for his campaign through a charity? Didn’t Rick Scott steal from Medicare? Maybe check Florida.
Some Republicans legislators do need to change and eventually WILL, as things will be so bad at home that they will feel forced. Look at the number already refusing to do Town Halls. They are VERY aware more people will soon be more "ticked off" than they are now. Some sociology and marketing classes cover research going back to the 1950s on "innovations". People adopt new ideas in sets, not all at once, first a few, then more and more.
The research jargon--"Early innovators" adopt first, as high in need and high in resources, such as having more spare time and cash. "Late innovators" go next as need to plan a bit first and save up a bit. Then comes "early majority", can't afford a big mistake, testing the waters by asking innovating neighbors how their new ideas worked out. That's where we are now, the first 50%. You are here, if you are in any of those three sets.
The lagging 50% delay more. It's harder for them to get the resources together, plus they don't want to upset the crankier neighbors who "keep bugging them" about this and that.
The most ready among them are the "late majority". That's who we are trying to persuade now. We get to a voting majority, we don't need more. Very last to adopt or not at all will be the "laggards" and the "never adopting". However, we don't need to reach 70% to win elections.
That means we do not NEED to shift the MAGA extremists, only some of their neighbors. We merely make it obvious to enough neighbors that following their local MAGA bullies is not smart.
We can listen to these podcasts and walk away with things to say.
AN EXAMPLE-- The early research on innovators was done on farmers. It took some places 30 years to switch most farmers, not just the innovators, from horse-and-plow set-ups, to tractors. We are in modern times and can get a 50% voting majority in far less time, due to the internet. You HAVE to have some patience, You HAVE to know how to convince some people, not everybody, just enough people, not many, as Trump DID NOT HAVE 50% behind him when he won. (We all feel angry, yes. It's hard for me to "put a lid" on my "boiling-over pot" of anger. I remind myself that: Anger leads to nastiness. Nastiness is a turn-off, generally shown to cause resistance. Yes, resistance. They might "say yes to your face" to get you to stop. But then they vote the opposite when the curtain is pulled and you can't see them.)
In a nutshell - the richest don't care . And our leaders are of the richest - so they won't do what is right for the old and the sick.
As I understand it; there are laws that prohibit Congress from giving themselves better health and retirement benefits - but they break the laws and their oaths regularly - look at how Congress changed the laws so they could steal over a billion from PPP. Even more unfair is how the fed and state employees get so much more in retirement benefits than the workers in social security that have supported them - as the fed worker works far fewer years. Why is any fed employee getting more than the average income of a family of 4 in the fed retirement system - they don't have to save for retirement -not fair. Maybe everyone should be in social security - Congress, generals, presidents, police.
The health and standard of living should be a concern of our leaders. Our country has the highest bankruptcy do to health costs. And creating wealth through tax rates on the rich ( to pass wealth on to the next generation) is not the way to create a healthy country. As a CPA - I am disgusted with the estate tax exemption too.
Shifting responsibility to the states hurts red states more than blue states. I guess all of the sick and hungry are in their current state because they’re lazy or don’t pray enough
The goal of DOGE is to reduce government waste, but they aren't going to even consider the biggest way to save money in the healthcare system. If the US went to a single payer healthcare system paid for by taxes (and much of the current system is paid for by taxes) it would save about $2.5T a year. That is more than DOGE purports to save over 10 years. Why isn't DOGE recommending this clear saving? It's because if implemented many of Republicans donors in the private system would be out of a job. This would also get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, VA Healthcare, Prison healthcare and many others. Other western countries spend about half what the US does per person and they cover everyone. Think what the US could save with it's economies of scale. Think of all the eliminated medical bankruptcies.
The goal of the administration may be to hand out tax breaks, but we fail to consider the long term, underlying effect. None of the forces driving the direction of the country, at present, explicitly state the deeper desire. As a combined group the era they see as the time when America was great, is the 19th century. The Trump stool (pun intended) rests on three legs. The MAGA base's will to force, the tecno-bros' neo-feudalism, and the white Christian nationalist's theocracy. The combined effect will be an impoverished America not only internally, but also our international standing.
The midterm elections are eighteen months away and the presidential election almost four years. Do you really think these people are going to say, "We gave it our best shot, but now it's time to step aside and let the demon rats undo what we're accomplished."? I have no idea how this gets stopped, but unless we can find a way, we're headed to becoming Hungary, Russia or the DPRK where you never expect the government to do anything for you.
Here's a side note to consider. Internal Russian documents show that the Russia's goal in intervening in the Syrian civil war was not to assist al-Assad. It was to drive a foreign non-white/non-Christian population out of the middle east and cause Europe to destabilize.
“Plenty of able-bodied Americans can’t get health insurance because their low-wage jobs don’t offer coverage and because they can’t afford to buy insurance on their own.“ My workplace offers an insurance plan, but I (and many of my coworkers) cannot afford to be on it. It is simply too much out of each paycheck, and while health insurance is important, I can’t eat or pay rent with it. We are offered free life insurance coverage, though, because apparently it’s cheaper if we just all die rather than be offered affordable medical coverage.
Damned if they doing anything, damned if they don't! Recession here we come!
"What’s clearer is that checking people for eligibility more frequently creates extra work for both states and individual beneficiaries. Experience has shown—repeatedly—that the end result is people losing their Medicaid, even when they are still eligible, because of bureaucratic breakdowns and complex paperwork."
Republicans: "We will end waste in Medicaid by introducing... [check notes] MORE WASTE!!"
Brilliant idea, let's make recipients acquire documents from employers, fill out paperwork, give it to health care providers to check and verify, have someone up the chain in a state office track, check and verify, send that into to some federal office to track, check and verify with a chance to cut them off at every level to rid the system of waste. Because paperwork = better health.
People who qualify for Medicaid often have variable incomes. They pick up a shift here and there, maybe work a temporary job for a few weeks or months, raising their income slightly above the threshold, but then they fall back down again. There's no way this small, temporary increase can cover medical bills or medication, especially at "uninsured" rates. Republicans argue that programs like Medicaid trap people in dependence and poverty. In fact, setting up the system to remove benefits as soon as someone briefly crosses a hard ceiling for eligibility discourages them from working those extra shifts just to remain eligible. "I can't take that shift or I'll lose my Medicaid and my kid won't get their medicine."
Of course we know the goal for Republicans is to erect barriers to federal assistance for the poor. That way, they can pretend to afford tax cuts that will let Elon pay off yet another woman to have yet another kid...
please cut the money flowing to your locals, please please please please i'm begging u to eff this up big time. the job so in this area has been good -- B+. but u can do even better. do not read this then, go about your normal biz of screwing your base and everyone else so rich guys that fund your campaigns keeping ensconced in your bs legislative job for self enrichment continues. this is not a warning. ignore it completely. it's joe biden writing it and kamala told me what to write. i'm also a communist and read about karl marx ... once.
In red states like my own Florida there’s no way the Rs would increase state funding for Medicaid or any other safety net program. Our electeds do not actually care about us. They act in lockstep with their party. They do not act in accordance with the needs of the state’s citizens.
Thank you, Jonathan for your great writing. This column packed so much information in few words that I’m amazed. Bravo!
Great article, good explanation of the current situation and what the rethugiclans plan to do to make it worse for the average person!!😡
Appreciate the clarity of this. Healthcare financing has become so damned complicated that it might, someday, force the system to some kind of single payer. It's all Ptolemaic epicycles ...
Say it loud and often: The Republicans are working for a backdoor repeal of the ACA.