Jump to content

merrill

Member
  • Content Count

    20,439
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    Conservative

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    male/female

Profile Information

  • Gender
    male
  • Location
    Lawrence
  • Interests
    plenty

Recent Profile Visitors

4,913 profile views
  1. There's a reason why women love wearing men's underwear so much Maybe it's the shape. Maybe it's the style. Maybe it's the lack of uncomfortable lace that rides up every time you move a mere inch causing you to readjust yourself for the eighth time that day. As it turns out though, there is a reason why so many women prefer wearing their fella's underwear and it's not too far off that lack of lace predicament. According to fashion company Style Compare, almost 50 percent of women in relationships with men between the age of 18 and 24 like to borrow their partner's underwear. And that's because men's underwear is just so much more comfortable and practical. Style Compare's spoke person said that it all boiled down to the way men's underwear is designed, ie: not just for aesthetic purposes. "Men benefit from designs that put support and comfort first," they said. Of course they do. https://www.her.ie/life/theres-reason-lot-women-love-mens-underwear-much-371233
  2. A four year degree is not quite enough. Having two or three sources of income is not a bad idea. Why? There are at least 6 reasons to keep in mind. 1. Mergers 2. Hostile Takeovers 3. Leveraged Buyouts 4. Free Trade Agreements 5. Reagan/Bush Savings and Loan home loan scandal which killed the economy and cost the USA millions of jobs. 6. Bush/Cheney Home Loan scandal killed the economy and cost the USA millions of jobs All of above ultimately translate into millions upon millions upon millions of USA job losses. Big time layoffs are the end result. These jobs go abroad with tax codes that prevent taxation on profits made abroad by USA big name corporations. There was a time when becoming employed by corporate America came with long term employment, fine wages and dependable retirement benefits. Those days are gone. After a 4 year degree one might consider a Vocational-Technical Institute to become a highly skilled technician in some field.This will make any college grad more marketable and perhaps open doors to self employment. Or if one has the dollars becoming a career student is as respectable as any other job. ======= BTW it's not unions and Social Security breaking the economy it is Big Dollar White Collar ENTITLEMENTS, Wall Street crooks, the nations largest banks, the war for oil control and the medical insurance industry! Workers ARE NOT killing Economy! People on the job = a strong economy. Keeping people out of jobs will bring on a series of tax increases by way of user fees. YES user fees are aka taxes no matter what. How does putting people out of jobs create economic growth? AGAIN it's not unions breaking the economy it is Big Dollar White Collar ENTITLEMENTS, Wall Street crooks, the nations largest banks, the war for oil control and the medical insurance industry! Big Dollar White Collar ENTITLEMENTS are killing the economy and our wallets http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2001/0301miller.html
  3. “The people power on this issue continues to intensify as Americans feel the pain of a health care system that is focused more on profit than it is on providing health care,” said Melinda St. Louis, Public Citizen’s Medicare-for-All campaign director. “The American people won’t stop pushing for significant change. The question is not if we will win – it is when.”
  4. “The people power on this issue continues to intensify as Americans feel the pain of a health care system that is focused more on profit than it is on providing health care,” said Melinda St. Louis, Public Citizen’s Medicare-for-All campaign director. “The American people won’t stop pushing for significant change. The question is not if we will win – it is when.”
  5. “Tens of millions go uncovered, tens of millions more find that their insurance doesn’t cover what they need and our health outcomes are inferior to those other countries. We can do better.” Jayapal’s Medicare-for-All legislation would cover every American, end co-pays and deductibles, and expand Medicare to cover dental, visual and long-term care. But the momentum is bringing out powerful industries that profit from the existing system and are peddling falsehoods about Medicare-for-All. Public Citizen is beating them to the punch. On Feb. 4, the organization issued a comprehensive look at the research available on Medicare-for-All, that debunked the myths and laid out how such a policy would cut administrative waste, reduce profiteering off health care and lead to additional federal revenue. The analysis, “The Case for Medicare-for-All,” found that such a health care system not only would reduce overall health care spending compared to employer-based insurance, but also would improve financial stability for struggling rural hospitals and doctors, without increasing patient wait times. Patients would no longer need to worry about debt-inducing medical bills or loss of coverage. ================================================================================================= Researchers at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and elsewhere have shown that: Medicare-for-All would save money by reducing administrative costs by $500 billion per year (U.S. health care spending totals about $3.5 trillion per year) and allowing the government to negotiate for more affordable medicines; Medicare-for-All would cost patients less than employer-sponsored insurance and improve access to community-based services, including home health care; Under Medicare-for-All, there would not be increased wait times, in part because improved financial incentives for providers would mean better prioritization of care, leading to improved access and a reduction of unnecessary costs. Industry groups aren’t just on the wrong side of the facts; they also are on the wrong side of public opinion. ================================================================================================= A Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll has found a consistent increase in support for a single-payer government health care system over the past 20 years. ================================================================================================= Additionally, a January 2019 Harvard/Politico poll found that 68 percent of all voters, including 70 percent of independents, said providing health insurance coverage for everyone through a taxpayer-funded national plan is an extremely important priority.
  6. Medicare-for-All Truths Drown Out Industry Lies - Public Citizen Medicare-for-All Truths Drown Out Industry Lies - Public Citizen This article appeared in the March/April 2019 edition of Public Citizen News. Download the full edition here. Ma... And: Here are 10 great reasons to support IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Insurance: 1. Everybody In, Nobody Out. Universal means access to health care for everyone, period. Plus it is estimated to create 2.6 million new jobs! 2. Portability. If you are unemployed, or lose or change jobs, your health coverage stays with you. 3. Uniform Benefits. No Cadillac plans for the wealthy and Pinto plans for everyone else, with high deductibles, limited services, caps on payments for care, and no protection in the event of a catastrophe. One level of comprehensive care for everyone, regardless of the size of your wallet. 4. Prevention. By removing financial roadblocks, a universal health system encourages preventive care that lowers an individual's ultimate cost and pain and suffering when problems are neglected and societal cost in the over-utilization of emergency rooms or the spread of communicable diseases. 5. Choice. Most private insurance restricts your choice of providers and hospitals. Under the U.S. National Health Insurance Act, patients have a choice, and the provider is assured a fair payment. 6. No Interference with Care. Caregivers and patients regain their autonomy to decide what's best for a patient's health, not what's dictated by the billing department. No denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions or cancellation of policies for "unreported" minor health problems. 7. Reducing Waste. One third of every private health insurance dollar goes for paperwork and profits, compared to about 3% under Medicare, the federal government’s universal system for senior citizen healthcare. 8. Cost Savings. A guaranteed health care system can produce the cost savings needed to cover everyone, largely by using existing resources without the waste. Taiwan, shifting from a U.S. private health care model, adopted a similar system in 1995, boosting health coverage from 57% to 97% with little increase in overall health care spending. 9. Common Sense Budgeting. The public system sets fair reimbursements applied equally to all providers, private and public, while assuring that appropriate health care is delivered, and uses its clout to negotiate volume discounts for prescription drugs and medical equipment. 10. Public Oversight. The public sets the policies and administers the system, not high priced CEOs meeting in private and making decisions based on their company’s stock performance needs.
  7. bump bump bump ..... the evidence will be presented in the "courtroom" ............
  8. In the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2004, four top computer scientists from the University of California, Johns Hopkins University, and Rice University similarly critiqued Diebold’s voting system: "We found significant security flaws: voters can trivially cast multiple ballots with no built-in traceability, administrative functions can be performed by regular voters, and the threats posed by insiders such as poll workers, software developers, and janitors is even greater. Based on our analysis of the development environment, including change logs and comments, we believe that an appropriate level of programming discipline for a project such as this was not maintained. In fact, there appears to have been little quality control in the process. "…The model where individual vendors write proprietary code to run our elections appears to be unreliable, and if we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate." Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic process, we need to ensure that there are no such questions. Therefore, it is crucial that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and that random audits of electronic votes be conducted on Election Day. Paperless electronic voting machines make it impossible to safeguard the integrity of our vote - thereby threatening the very foundation of our democracy. Moreover, the seller of the machines, the Diebold Corporation, is a supplier of money to one of the major party candidates, George W. Bush. The CEO and top officers of Diebold are major contributors to the Bush campaign. A corporation with vested political interests should not have control over the votes of the populace."
  9. In the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy 2004, four top computer scientists from the University of California, Johns Hopkins University, and Rice University similarly critiqued Diebold’s voting system: "We found significant security flaws: voters can trivially cast multiple ballots with no built-in traceability, administrative functions can be performed by regular voters, and the threats posed by insiders such as poll workers, software developers, and janitors is even greater. Based on our analysis of the development environment, including change logs and comments, we believe that an appropriate level of programming discipline for a project such as this was not maintained. In fact, there appears to have been little quality control in the process. "…The model where individual vendors write proprietary code to run our elections appears to be unreliable, and if we do not change the process of designing our voting systems, we will have no confidence that our election results will reflect the will of the electorate." Computers are inherently subject to programming error, equipment malfunction, and malicious tampering. If we are to ensure fair and honest elections, and retain voter confidence in our democratic process, we need to ensure that there are no such questions. Therefore, it is crucial that any computerized voting system provide a voter-verifiable paper audit trail and that random audits of electronic votes be conducted on Election Day. Paperless electronic voting machines make it impossible to safeguard the integrity of our vote - thereby threatening the very foundation of our democracy. Moreover, the seller of the machines, the Diebold Corporation, is a supplier of money to one of the major party candidates, George W. Bush. The CEO and top officers of Diebold are major contributors to the Bush campaign. A corporation with vested political interests should not have control over the votes of the populace."
  10. APRIL 9, 2019 The analysis, “The Case for Medicare-for-All,” found that such a health care system not only would reduce overall health care spending compared to employer-based insurance, but also would improve financial stability for struggling rural hospitals and doctors, without increasing patient wait times. Patients would no longer need to worry about debt-inducing medical bills or loss of coverage. Researchers at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst and elsewhere have shown that: Medicare-for-All would save money by reducing administrative costs by $500 billion per year (U.S. health care spending totals about $3.5 trillion per year) and allowing the government to negotiate for more affordable medicines; Medicare-for-All would cost patients less than employer-sponsored insurance and improve access to community-based services, including home health care; Under Medicare-for-All, there would not be increased wait times, in part because improved financial incentives for providers would mean better prioritization of care, leading to improved access and a reduction of unnecessary costs. Industry groups aren’t just on the wrong side of the facts; they also are on the wrong side of public opinion. A Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll has found a consistent increase in support for a single-payer government health care system over the past 20 years. Additionally, a January 2019 Harvard/Politico poll found that 68 percent of all voters, including 70 percent of independents, said providing health insurance coverage for everyone through a taxpayer-funded national plan is an extremely important priority. Public Citizen is investing more resources to ramp up a massive grassroots campaign to build the people power needed to overcome the corporate opposition and eventually win Medicare-for-All. On Feb. 14, thousands of Public Citizen members participated in a virtual townhall meeting with Representative Jayapal and Weissman to learn about the details of the Medicare-for-All bill and the next steps in our campaign. Hundreds of our members committed to urge their members of Congress to sign on as cosponsors to the Medicare-for-All legislation and to educate their communities and local elected officials to build a lasting movement to move Medicare-for-All over the finish line “The people power on this issue continues to intensify as Americans feel the pain of a health care system that is focused more on profit than it is on providing health care,” said Melinda St. Louis, Public Citizen’s Medicare-for-All campaign director. “The American people won’t stop pushing for significant change. The question is not if we will win – it is when.” APRIL 9, 2019
×
×
  • Create New...