Because the F'n democrats don't want to give the military pay raises and keep it in poverty. ..... Again..... research under what administrations pay raises have come under..... and how much they were.
If you think we can pull the "good pre-existing clause" out separately, you don't understand it at all.
I wasn't trying to suggest "pulling it".... I think that's a very good thing. We just need to figure out a way for it NOT to cost individuals an arm and a leg.
You call into question those numbers simply because they don't fit into your pre-conception of what a welfare recipient is.(leeches)
I'm sorry, i used the wrong word. I didn't mean pulling it out. I meant getting rid of Obamacare while keeping the ban on pre-existing conditions. Is that something you'd support?
No, I call into question those numbers because where I worked as a police officer (and where I've lived as a private citizen), about 80% of the population was on government assistance..... and about 80% of the recipients specifically found jobs where they would never be paid over the "cut off" amount to continue the government assistance (purposefully limited their hours/pay rate).
is there a credible citation to verify this... or is this just one of those things you know?
No no no, not at all...... I do NOT want a ban on pre-existing conditions..... but we have to find *some* way to keep the insurance companies from raping everyone on premiums and cost, which the AHA *clearly* has not accomplished.
I have lived in some pretty poor areas, and worked in them the majority of the time I was on patrol...... I can't count the number of times I heard people brag about how good it was to be getting free stuff off of the government, not wanting to take extra hours or pay raises because that would put them at a pay rate negating their current assistance (EBT, bill payments, cell phones, etc.), and most off all, going above a certain pay bracket would disallow them from section 8 housing, or put their rent into a bracket they "couldn't afford".
can you verify this.... or is it just another thing you know?
Your response just confirms you question the numbers because of your own bias. You responded with "your experience", never considering that it might not represent the majority of welfare recipients.
See you don't understand Obamacare. You can't have coverage for people with pre-existing conditions(sick people who are costly and non profitable to cover) without the individual mandate(healthy people who are profitable to cover). The individual mandate pays for the ban on not covering pre-existing conditions. Remove the individual mandate and their is no way to pay for the people with pre-existing conditions.
In "my experience" I worked and lived (for many years) in a couple of the areas with the highest number, and the highest concentration of people receiving government assistance.
And the majority of people living in poverty in the USA live in rural areas, not urban, and are white, not the commonly believed urban African-American.
I understand the AHA very well. You CAN have coverage for people with pre-existing conditions, but charging everyone else for the burden is wrong. Now, also, we need to look at corporate salaries withing the medical insurance companies; and let's face it, once you dictate a salary, you're going into invasion of a free-market economy and private business, which I don't believe in....... so ..... do I have all the answers, no. But I certainly believe we could vastly improve.
Please don't assume "what I meant". I am aware of most of what the article stated. It's not a bad source..... 20 years old, but still valuable. I also know the difference between living 2 miles from my nearest neighbor (outside of Alto, Texas), and living in areas where most people like me would be shot on site (Houston's Sunnyside ).
i read sentence one.... and then i read sentence two.... puzzled... i read sentence one... and then i read sentence two....puzzled...i read...
