Tab Content
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-11-2017, 05:45 PM
    Yep, this is why subsidies and entitlements of any type don't work on the middle class. They only hold moderate value with the lower class too as there is no way to measure effort, ability etc to see if someone is even trying or putting forth effort to help themselves. With all subsidies and entitlements we also compensate people for poor life choices. Many for endless streams of them.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-11-2017, 05:40 PM
    I don't "hate" anyone. I simply don't want to be forced to subsidize anyone. I don't need the government or some mob of strangers deciding how much. where or to whom I will give charity.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-10-2017, 10:07 AM
    So are people you don't know and never will... so what is your point?
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-09-2017, 10:13 PM
    How can you possibly have subsidies without drop dead barely surviving asset limits? What this means is anyone paying subsidies is actually subsidizing every asset the receiving person has. He pays their premiums while they sit on tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is the insanity of a middle class entitlement. You are not subsidizing the persons healthcare. You are subsidizing their entire life style and stabilize them in a false standard of living they can't afford. It is a standard of living subsidy when you are not dirt poor. Look at it like this... if I subsidize your healthcare insurance or car insurance etc every month as a middle class person you can then use the money you would have to pay for your healthcare on cigarettes, booze, cocaine and strip clubs. You are not living out of dumpsters being a middle class person with unlimited assets. Many of these subsidies are enough to pay for a real nice new car payment which they are allowed to have. The subsidies on a person with a preexisting condition are easily a house payment in most parts of the country not on the coast. You can't have a poor pitiful me person with preexisting conditions sitting on a bunch of assets wanting or demanding subsidies. It is insane to subsidize people on these income levels with unlimited assets. They have to be reduced to nothing more than a beater car to get to work before getting handouts.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-09-2017, 04:20 PM
    That is simply not the function of insurance. Insurance is made up of pools according to risk. The health of that pool determines your rate and allows the insurance company to compete for the highly profitable low risk good drivers. Your rate is first based on your level of risk to the insurer/investors. Second you are put into a pool of like driver risks. The bad drivers are forced to pay higher rates based on their level of risk and they are also screened into a different insurance pool. In other words a pool of bad drivers pay for bad drivers. This is why many insurance companies won't even insure bad drivers at all. It keeps their pool healthy to be competitive. Insurance is not a giant socialistic enterprise for good drivers or healthy people to subsidize lower rates and cover losses of the negligent high risk people. Healthcare insurance is also made up of risk pools except Obamacare which is run by government force instead of competition and free market principals. That is why accepting preexisting conditions is insurance pool suicide. You can't give high risk people low risk rates then jack up the low risk risk people to compensate. That makes as much sense as good drivers subsidizing drunk drivers because they can't afford their insurance rates based on their level of risk. Can you imagine the cost of auto insurance under that? Forced good driver rates for multiple accident and drunk drivers? That is what they want with Obamacare or single payer. Under both those plans the high risk people are also allowed to keep unlimited assets and still have lower paid people with less assets subsidize their rates. It is extortion not insurance. They want to reward high risk behaviors and situations then penalize low risk behaviors and situations.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-09-2017, 12:08 PM
    The problem with the spin of your reuters article is they avoid the entire problem. The problem is Obamacare promotes middle class people to subsidize and support other middle class people. You can't subsidize one thing with a middle class person. When I subsidize someone's healthcare with no asset requirements I subsidize every asset they own. There are people on Obamacare with high six figures in home equity, 401K, stocks, bonds, investment property, cash reserves, life insurance and tons of other assets. There are ZERO asset requirements on Obamacare... only income. Some poor slob in Arkansas living in an apartment making $40K a year living paycheck to paycheck is being forced to subsidize someone in San Diego with a pre-existing condition who has $700K home equity and $150 in a 401K. A family of 3 can make up to $80K a year and still qualify for subsidies. Obamacare combined with raising the asset amount and incomes you can have on Medicaid simply moved entitlements to the middle class. We now are stating $80K a year is poor and need help. Medicaid and Obamacare are taking us down a long ugly road much like we faced in the 1960's with the welfare state programs. People will exploit the crap out of these medical subsidies and they will grow like wildfire. You make a stand now or will be steamrolled into an yet another giant extortion racket.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-09-2017, 11:50 AM
    Actually premiums will not rise. Subsidies will go down is what happens. It is the way the entitlement junkies spin the situation. Technically the premiums would rise if subsidies are cut but only on those not paying their real premium cost in the marketplace in the first place. Premiums would go down dramatically on non subsidized individuals because they can get rid of all the dead weight of parasites looking for hosts on Obamacare. If you want to attract people to any service or industry you "LOWER" rates and cut out subsidies. As long as you continue or raise subsidies people paying their own way will leave you like cheetahs at a salad bar.
    35 replies | 750 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-03-2017, 02:22 PM
    Unfortunately all "givers" as in employers of every type are in the "totally screw the employee" business. Thus people have to get collective and buy their way to the top in this game. AMA and every other lobby are basically unions representing individuals by a different name. Both unions and lobby's purchase government force. People on entitlements are the true "takers" as they give absolutely nothing back in return to the payers. Entitlements are pure extortion. “Teacher complains about pension money. Gives money to union that spends millions on political campaigns.” Corporations and the wealthy give money to lobby’s and politicians then complain about too much competition, low profits and poor ROI. Same crap.
    4 replies | 196 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-03-2017, 01:52 PM
    When a group moves from believing or speaking about something to extorting property by force that is a true enemy to liberty. Socialists are extortionists via mob rule using the government as their Agent Of Extortion. You are correct they do have the freedom to talk about extortion, robbery, burglary, money laundering etc as long as they don't carry any to action. Socialists have a real bad habit of carrying them to action and extortion. Actually the Central Committee was setup for wealth redistribution by force. The level of extortion was so high it had to be carried out by the military.
    275 replies | 6432 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    11-01-2017, 09:24 AM
    This pipeline is a bit of both. The real problem is currently Assad is going to let Russia put the pipeline through and mange the gas much like the US manages the Saudi oil which created the PETRODOLLAR. The petrodollar only exists for foreign oil exchanges. Every gallon of oil bought has to be purchased with US dollars. If the pipeline goes to Russia it establishes a competing global currency as every bit of natural gas purchased by Europe will be done in Russian currency. The Rupee also does not have $20 trillion in debt attached to it making it a much more attractive global currency. If they can get China onboard that would be the end of the Petrodollar. The crash of the Petrodollar is much more monetarily substantial than not getting the natural gas to sell. It would massively effect virtually every US market. It is a double loss situation. We lose the natural gas and global currency. On the other hand if we get the pipeline and gas it could double the value of the Petrodollar. This one could get real ugly and WWIII type threats, posturing or even activity are not out of the question. The western banking cartel is known for being REAL sore losers.
    34 replies | 587 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    10-31-2017, 11:15 AM
    It is not about being "irresponsible". It is flat plain and simple "extortion". I currently pay for 80 million to get free cradle to grave healthcare on Medicaid. I pay in and get nothing myself. Same with all the entitlement programs I am not eligible for. Social Security and Medicare are entitlement programs too. They are also paid for with "taxes". It was made clear to FDR the federal government could start neither an investment or insurance program. They all blatantly compete with existing private business. He was told however he could "call" the program anything he liked. Much like "healthcare for all" etc. He could blatantly lie to the the people about what the program actually is so that is what he did. People are still deluded 80 years later. This is why we can dump Mexican National citizens, disabled and people who paid the minimum contribution into the system yet draw forever. What is so unique about people getting screwed on entitlements and taxes? The larger group of people always votes to extort from the smaller group. Once the boomers are gone the next group can vote in whatever entitlements they please. That is democracy better known as mob rule.
    64 replies | 1392 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    10-27-2017, 03:28 PM
    Totally agree about Bill King. I also remember the old AFL which was incredible to watch. Having two competing professional football teams was a great idea and you always loose quality with a monopoly. Loved the Madden years and the guy was one of the best announcers ever. Some guys might not mind a woman baseball announcer and I suppose some Cub Scouts like girls in their dens and Boy Scouts who want girls but not the overwhelming majority. Same with guys doing Tupperware or lingerie parties for the women. Could guys be really into it? Yes, but it just is not going to fly.
    275 replies | 6432 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    10-26-2017, 07:51 AM
    Baseball is not far behind. All the socialist feminist run cities like Chicago, New York etc are now moving their totally useless and unwanted 50+ year old women into the announcer booths. They have no announcer voices and know little if anything about baseball. Asking completely lame questions down on the field was not enough. They need to have them sitting in the booth reading scripts without a clue and chiming in lame crap some editor shoves in front of them. They don't have decades of playing baseball up through college ball and announcing AAA ballgames to get there. The networks won't pole their audience to find out if they want these women in the announcer booths in baseball or any sports because they know the answer in advance. You will get the quality of your broadcasts lowered to accommodate a feminist regime. Then follows all the rule, marketing etc changes to accommodate the women. The sports are eventually morphed into some bogus different sport. We now have to let girls in the frigging Cub and Boy Scouts up through Eagle Scout programs! There are things boys like to do without girls and men like to do without women. Why are these totally benign privacies being invaded?
    275 replies | 6432 view(s)
  • austin870's Avatar
    10-25-2017, 02:11 PM
    The league has also evolved from about 10% women watchers to over 45% and climbing. It is the fastest growing segment. While at the same time male viewers have declined. We saw cheerleaders disappear from TV and played way down at live games. We now have to endure these 50 something year old hags reading scripts on the sidelines just to appease the feminist regime. Asking questions like "how is that concussion?" or "how do you plan on over coming a 21 point deficit at halftime?". We have commercials for makeup and women pharmaceuticals during the games. Half time shows are geared for women. It is the fastest growing segment of the sales business and women buy WAY more lame crap off TV commercials than men do. The NFL has massively toned down the violence and are evolving the rules to attract more women viewers thus selling more sponsor advertised crap. Now we have the feminist pushing agendas like violence against women, breast cancer etc crap with players wearing pink shoes, ribbons and other garbage to highlight feminist causes. The feminist are also now pushing these minority causes with the poor pitiful me being abused by the police and middle class white males. This isn't about any one of these things. It is the decade after decade progression in the wrong direction from the original male viewing audience. They are making the NFL a women run and women viewer dominated sport. OH don't forget they are doing this with the entire country too!
    275 replies | 6432 view(s)
No More Results
About austin870

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
27
Posts Per Day
0.01
General Information
Last Activity
11-16-2017 07:15 PM
Join Date
02-05-2009
Referrals
0
No results to display...
No results to display...

11-10-2017


11-09-2017


10-28-2017


10-27-2017


10-25-2017