Obamacare and Sixty Minutes

[Julie]

If your karma runs over your dogma there may still be hope for you!

[Wulfman...]

So that makes you the victors? Of what? Seeing poor kids go without healthcare through no fault of their own - whatever their parents might have done or not done? Are you proud of yourself for that? Sickening - no pun intended!

Actually, it was the government that forced the insurance companies to make changes to the coverage in their policies......which made those policies null and void. It was "somebody's" intentions to force those previously insured people out into the market to either find other policies or sign up for the ACA coverage (probably the latter).
Some claim that there are now fewer people insured than there were before, some claim that some people who weren't insured are now insured........and nobody really knows for sure. The government is apparently keeping a tight grip on the statistics.
So, the "fault" resides with the government. And, the insurance companies were "co-conspirators" in this whole mess, too.


Den

.

[Goofproof]

If your karma runs over your dogma there may still be hope for you!

Better still, look both ways before you step off the curb into the path of the bus. Jim

As far as the government and statistics, they have to hold on to them tight, so they can mold them to their will.

[Hang Fire]

well, the thing is.... they don't care about anybody but themselves.

Do you ever read any social research? Conservatives give far more to charity than liberals. Charitable giving in "red states" is higher than charitable giving in "blue states".

But like Choker said, liberals judge by "good intentions" not by results. It doesn't matter what you actually give. To liberals it's just their thoughts that count. No need to open their pocketbooks.

uh huh.... suuuure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... after-all/

how much did YOU personally donate to charity this past year?

Did you read the article that you posted the link to? Did you get beyond the headline on the article? Did you use your comprehensive skills?

The article say red states gave 37% more to charity than blue states gave to charity. That is a large difference. I did not think it would be that much of a difference. Thanks for posting the article.

[palerider]

well, the thing is.... they don't care about anybody but themselves.

Do you ever read any social research? Conservatives give far more to charity than liberals. Charitable giving in "red states" is higher than charitable giving in "blue states".

But like Choker said, liberals judge by "good intentions" not by results. It doesn't matter what you actually give. To liberals it's just their thoughts that count. No need to open their pocketbooks.

uh huh.... suuuure. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... after-all/

how much did YOU personally donate to charity this past year?

Did you read the article that you posted the link to? Did you get beyond the headline on the article? Did you use your comprehensive skills?

The article say red states gave 37% more to charity than blue states gave to charity. That is a large difference. I did not think it would be that much of a difference. Thanks for posting the article.

... reviews a number of measures of civic engagement — beyond simple cash donations — and finds little red-blue divide.

First, while it may be true that red states dominate the ranked state list of charitable giving as a share of income, the difference is not so stark when you add up the residents of all the red and the blue states. Residents of red states gave 3.7 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity, compared to 2.7 percent in blue states.

[Hang Fire]

Lost your ability to speak so now you just copy and paste?

Residents of red states gave 3.7 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity, compared to 2.7 percent in blue states.

Yes, that is 37% more and that is a large difference. Bet you did not figure that out. It's even a much bigger difference when you figure there are many people who give nothing or close to nothing (Obama was one of them until release of his income tax returns embarrassed him and he started giving a bit.).

finds little red-blue divide.

Sure, that is not factual. It's only the opinion of the article writer who is a lib and probably gives nothing to charity.

[palerider]

Lost your ability to speak so now you just copy and paste?

Residents of red states gave 3.7 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity, compared to 2.7 percent in blue states.

Yes, that is 37% more and that is a large difference. Bet you did not figure that out. It's even a much bigger difference when you figure there are many people who give nothing or close to nothing (Obama was one of them until release of his income tax returns embarrassed him and he started giving a bit.).

well, let's see, how do we want to twist things to our advantage... because that's what one segment of the political landscape loves to do more than others.

you say "ZOMYGOD, US GOD FEARING REDDERS GAVE 37 PUCENTS MORE MONEY THAN YOU DEVIL WORSHIPING BLUERS!"

I say "oh, woop, you gave a whole 1% more. that's practically what a reasonable person would say is "statistically insignificant" in any factual analysis.

[Hang Fire]

I say "oh, woop, you gave a whole 1% more.

As I suspected, liberal arts degree. Illiterate mathematically, economically, financially.

[ChicagoGranny]

I say "oh, woop, you gave a whole 1% more.

As I suspected, liberal arts degree. Illiterate mathematically, economically, financially.

PailRider, Hang Fire has you on that one. If our CFO ever told me that was a 1% difference, I would fire him on the spot. It's a 37% difference and that is very significant. Next step would be to dig deep into the statistics. There is a chance you could find something to make an argument on. But I doubt it, because there are other studies that show conservatives give more to charity.

I hope you use a financial planner to keep your personal finances, especially taxes and retirement planning, straight. A good one may seem expensive, but they can save you a big multiple of their fee.

Good luck,

[tan]

Lost your ability to speak so now you just copy and paste?

Residents of red states gave 3.7 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity, compared to 2.7 percent in blue states.

Yes, that is 37% more and that is a large difference. Bet you did not figure that out. It's even a much bigger difference when you figure there are many people who give nothing or close to nothing (Obama was one of them until release of his income tax returns embarrassed him and he started giving a bit.).

well, let's see, how do we want to twist things to our advantage... because that's what one segment of the political landscape loves to do more than others.

you say "ZOMYGOD, US GOD FEARING REDDERS GAVE 37 PUCENTS MORE MONEY THAN YOU DEVIL WORSHIPING BLUERS!"

I say "oh, woop, you gave a whole 1% more. that's practically what a reasonable person would say is "statistically insignificant" in any factual analysis.

That is 1 percentage point more, which is a 37% difference in this case

[palerider]

PailRider, Hang Fire has you on that one. If our CFO ever told me that was a 1% difference, I would fire him on the spot. It's a 37% difference and that is very significant. Next step would be to dig deep into the statistics. There is a chance you could find something to make an argument on. But I doubt it, because there are other studies that show conservatives give more to charity.

grumpy, I call bullshit.

if your "CFO" only reported percentages of improvement, without giving you any real dollar amounts, and you act on that, you're a fool.

say you have a penny, and I give you 5 pennies, well, by your twisted view, you've got a 500% increase! you're RICH beyond belief.

from a practical standpoint, you've got 6 cents and can't buy shit.

but, like I said, you can't tell conservatives anything, their minds can't accept it, (scientifically proven fact).

37% increase sounds all big and important.

1% more doesn't sound very important.... yet in this case, the *fact* is that it's the same.

again, like I said, arguing politics is stupid and pointless... so now, I truly will stop.

make whatever parting shots at me you like.

[Goofproof]

I say "oh, woop, you gave a whole 1% more.

As I suspected, liberal arts degree. Illiterate mathematically, economically, financially.

PailRider, Hang Fire has you on that one. If our CFO ever told me that was a 1% difference, I would fire him on the spot. It's a 37% difference and that is very significant. Next step would be to dig deep into the statistics. There is a chance you could find something to make an argument on. But I doubt it, because there are other studies that show conservatives give more to charity.

I hope you use a financial planner to keep your personal finances, especially taxes and retirement planning, straight. A good one may seem expensive, but they can save you a big multiple of their fee. Good luck,

He doesn't need a financial planner, the government will providefor his wants and needs. Jim

Memo: Check Brakes, he seem to have a stopping problem.

[Hang Fire]

Memo: Check Brakes, he seem to have a stopping problem.

I was wondering if anyone else was noticing. He promised to press hard on the brakes four posts back:

sorry, I'm done. arguing politics is about as nonsensical as arguing religion.

facts don't enter into it, just 'faith' and 'belief' and therefore, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what someone else says, because nothing anybody says is going to change dens mind, or chevie's, etc.

people will believe whatever they want to, and attempts to show them differently will just be met by dogma.

as sludge says, you kids have fun.

[Sheffey]

so now, I truly will stop

You should never have started because you are oh so wrong and your angry followup posts just dig the hole you are standing in deeper.

I currently serve on the board of a local charity and have served on two others in past years. The state I live in is a so-called red state and has a charitable giving rate of 6.2% - much higher than the national average.

I can tell you for certain that if the giving rate in our state were to fall from 6.2% to 5.2% for example, there would be many charities cutting services, laying off staff, closing down locations and experiencing lots of distress.

You may know some things about CPAP, but do study some math and finance before you try to explain charitable giving.