ChiGoose

As far as Medicare is concerned, I would roll Medicare and Medicaid into one program to reduce administrative costs (which is something like 25% of healthcare costs). You can keep or modify the eligibility and specifics of the programs, but having multiple healthcare administrations seems like a waste. For social security, I'd raise or eliminate the payroll tax cap. I think today it only taxes the first $150k of salaries. So if you make more than that, you have a lower effective SS payroll tax than someone making less. Makes very little sense to me. Raising or eliminating the cap would increase the money going into the program. You could also look at other revenue streams such as a wealth tax, but honestly we should scale income tax brackets similarly to how we had them in the post-war boom. Also we should look at how the super wealthy avoid taxes by taking out loans against their assets for cash instead of having a W-2 wage that would be taxed. I would like to avoid things like reducing benefits or raising the eligibility age. These are programs that people paid into their whole lives and they should be able to rely on them. As far as means testing, it depends on how it's done, but if we can do it easily and accurately (which is not always a guarantee), then I'm good with it.

...what are you talking about? Are you high?

I think that the focus should be on fixing and expanding them. The GOP approach is to cut funding for programs that help Americans. Whatever the problem we are facing, the solution is always: cut programs for working and average Americans and reduce taxes on corporations and the rich. Economy is bad? Cut programs for Americans, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations. Economy is good? Cut programs for Americans, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations. Inflation? Cut programs for Americans, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations. War? Cut programs for Americans, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations. Stubbed my toe? Cut programs for Americans, reduce taxes for the rich and corporations. The approach to everything is to ensure that the rich and powerful have a larger share of the pie at the expense of the working schlubs.

https://about.bgov.com/news/entitlement-spending-cap-plans-linked-by-gop-to-debt-limit-deal/ "The Republican Study Committee, the largest group of House Republicans, released a budget plan in June that called on lawmakers to gradually raise the Medicare age of eligibility to 67 and the Social Security eligibility to 70 before indexing both to life expectancy. It backed withholding payments to those who retired early and had earnings over a certain limit. And it endorsed the consideration of options to reduce payroll taxes that fund Social Security and redirect them to private alternatives. It also urged lawmakers to “phase-in an increase in means testing” for Medicare." Raise the eligibility age and cut the funding. But don't you worry! They will make sure to keep those taxes low for their rich donors and corporations. The best part is that, in order to force these changes, they will threaten to tank the economy: "The four Republicans interested in serving as House Budget Committee chairman in the next Congress said in interviews that next year’s deadline to raise or suspend the debt ceiling is a point of leverage if their party can win control of the House in the November midterm elections."

You act like I owe you my time and attention. I don't owe you *****. If I tried to respond to every dumb, ignorant, and blatantly false thing being said on this site, I'd have no time for anything else. You play this game where you post a ton of absolute BS and if people respond, you ignore the reality staring you in the face. If they don't, you claim victory. You must lead a very sad and pathetic life in the real world. I feel bad for you. I've already responded to this topic, but you keep tagging me because you have a crush on me. I get it, I'm pretty fantastic, but you're several years too late.

Don’t forget to cut Social Security and Medicare!

While I am flattered that I seem to always be on your mind, I have already told you that I am happily married. Hopefully you find that special someone someday!

I’m doing great! Thanks for asking

Yep. She was a terrible candidate. So terrible she lost to a guy who had no idea what he was doing and actually was probably mad that he won.

Cool story, bro. The idea that anyone can read the moronic screeds you post here and agree with them explains why this country is so screwed.

You’re DRsGhost? That explains a lot. And here I thought there was a new poster who grew up eating lead paint chips under high tension power lines.

Do you have any evidence for this? Or just the solitary anecdote of "Doc, some random person on a Buffalo Bills message board, says its true, so we can throw out anything that says otherwise"?

Because there is no evidence of it. According to the affidavit, Pelosi denied knowing DePape "13. Pelosi was interviewed by SFPD Officer Ariane Starks in the ambulance during transport to San Francisco General Hospital. Pelosi stated he had never seen DEPAPE before." (page 4) Also, DePape stated that he broke into the house with the intent to harm Nancy Pelosi: 15,a "DEPAPE stated that he was going to hold Nancy hostage and talk to her. If Nancy were to tell DEPAPE the “truth,” he would let her go, and if she “lied,” he was going to break “her kneecaps.” DEPAPE was certain that Nancy would not have told the “truth.” In the course of the interview, DEPAPE articulated he viewed Nancy as the “leader of the pack” of lies told by the Democratic Party. DEPAPE also later explained that by breaking Nancy’s kneecaps, she would then have to be wheeled into Congress, which would show other Members of Congress there were consequences to actions." (page 5) I think it's good practice to reserve judgment on breaking news stories until we have some good facts. And then as the facts come out, we should always re-examine our priors. In this instance, we have a sworn statement from an FBI agent disclosing information from the investigation that includes: Pelosi stating he did not know DePape DePape saying he broke into the house that night to harm Nancy Pelosi At this point, that should be enough to discredit any claims that it was actually a gay lovers' quarrel. If facts change, we can always re-examine this, but of the two options: DePape is a stranger to the Pelosi's broke into the house to harm the Speaker DePape was actually a secret lover of Paul Pelosi's and they got into a fight anyone still promoting 2 as a likely option is just disclosing that they will reject reality if it is inconvenient to them. Also, I want to be clear that I am not accusing you of this. Just trying to explain why I believe the gay lover claim is a conspiracy theory.

So you're saying that actually the more educated people are the more they support the GOP? If so, can you provide support for this claim? Or you just being a troll who adds no value to anything?

I've been wondering where he went since I came back. Here I was just assuming he had been arrested for breaking into Nancy Pelosi's house...

I explained the issues with your post in a good faith effort to respond to your request that I attempt to refute them. You decided to run away instead and then pretend that proves your right. In the end, I don't think it matters. I couldn't convince anyone on PPP that the sky was blue if the federalist, brietbart or their Godking said otherwise.

There is a conspiracy theory that Paul Pelosi knew DePape and was involved in an affair with him As to the facts, here is what we know at this time: Sworn Affidavit against DePape While we should wait for more details, based on the location of the house, my guess is that he was able to break in from the street as security would be pretty light with the Speaker out of town. Unfortunately, we're not likely to get specifics on how many members of Pelosi's detail are present at the house while she's away since that would compromise security (ironically).

LOL! You're asking me to do all of the work, and then I ask for clarification, you say no and then claim it as evidence that I don't know what's going on. Classic! "durr hurrr go through thousands of posts and find the specific things I'm talking about and respond to them or else you're admitting your wrong. I am very smart" What a joke!

He'd fit right in at PPP

I mean, I don't know it because it wasn't. People are just mad that their Godking lost to a boring elderly guy because everyone was so sick of his ***** that they would have voted for a ham sandwich to get rid of him. "But I don't know anyone who voted for Biden!" claim the people who spend all day on The Federalist and spout so much nonsense they don't get invites to Thanksgiving dinner anymore. If the Dems actually rigged the election, why the hell would they set it up so they LOST seats in the House? Why would they set it up so they needed to win TWO senate seats in GEORGIA to just have the Senate as a TIE? Dems were talking about taking senate seats in Texas and Maine. If they rigged the elections, how come they lost those? They were CRUSHED in Maine. Wasn't even close. If they were really rigging the election, they would have expanded their control of the House and won more than 50 senate seats. Hell, why not do a supermajority so you don't have to worry about the filibuster? Why is it that the people who still claim the election was stolen are the kind of people who believe that Paul Pelosi was actually in a gay love affair? Or that the Russia investigation was a hoax (something that was disproven by Marco Rubio)? That climate change is a hoax? Or believe in replacement theory? Any time some news story comes out where the simplest explanation makes the Right look bad, we get a half dozen crazy theories about why it's actually a good thing for the GOP or it's all a lie, or it's (((Soros))) or the (((globalists))) or Clinton was behind it. Occam's Razor: every leading GOP official, every GOP election administrator, basically every attorney who isn't pleading the 5th all agree: Joe Biden won in 2020. The Dunning-Krueger effect on this board is incredible.

Can you provide any evidence for any of the claims you made? Or even phrase them in a falsifiable manner? Are you asserting that ballot boxes were illegal? Or were placed illegally? If so, where? Do you have any evidence that county clerks interfered with the election? Are you claiming that the lack of voter signatures in Georgia meant that there were enough fake ballots to change the outcome of the election? Are you claiming that the Democrats are so ingenious and powerful as to rig a US election but forgot to do anything about the House? "And the election was rigged with every illegal drop box placed in Democrat-heavy precincts" is a nothing sentence that cannot be proven true or false. Something like "Democrats illegally placed drop boxes in Philadelphia" would be something that someone can respond to. Your screed needs a bit of editing and evidentiary support before anyone could meaningfully respond to it.

Buddy, the article is quoting Pew Research. There’s even a link in there but it’s for the data on Google sheets which would have been a weird thing to link.

It’s true. Educated voters are flocking to the Dems while the uneducated are trending to the GOP.

The less educated people are, the more likely they are to vote for the GOP.

Exactly