|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 04:59 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place.
"we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors.
|
On December 21 2017 05:33 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:24 Mohdoo wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? What in gods name do you do for a living? why would you be surprised? it sounds like a fairly typical wage. Yeah, it's a shitty wage and shitty hours, but $13/h is not something anyone should be surprised exists.
|
On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors.
They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd.
|
On December 21 2017 05:45 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors. They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd.
they didn’t ‘find’ it, they attempted to take it out of the ACA as one of their thousand little cuts towards failure. your borderline religious belief that they want to prolong any kind of sponsored healthcare while systematically eliminating all of it is astounding.
again claiming that haggling is normal while they just took 1.5 trillion out of the government. ? but like you said, we’ll all watch it happen together live. my money is on them funding a smaller caricature of the program before eliminating it entirely when they need to fund the tax cut.
|
On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see.
Cartoon villains at least sometimes have some internal struggle and complexity to them beyond "become captain planet villain for $$$." The "Maverick's" vote to repeal individual mandate with the tax bill after voting against the ACA repeal was less convincing than a certain villain's arc in a recent Disney movie.
Paul Ryan would never be written as a spinless Ayn Rand fan boy plunging a nation head-first into oligarchy because no-one would be convinced by such a cartoonishly self-caricatured figure. It wouldn't even be good fiction. "This is how we know we’re a real family here" might as well be straight out of a B-grade mafia drama.
|
On December 21 2017 05:45 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors. They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd.
"we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors.
The bill Democrats rejected was a poison bill. The money exists (or Republicans don't care about debt, either way is shown by the tax cut).
|
On December 21 2017 05:45 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors. They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd. They just spent 1.5 trillion on a tax cut. They couldn’t find 14 billion in there for CHIP?
The problem with you’re argument is that you are operating under the assumption that we are deeply stupid.
|
On December 21 2017 05:24 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? What in gods name do you do for a living? Seriously, this is super common. Both as a paid hourly with overtime and off-the-books only first 8 hours are paid, but you lose the job if you don’t help out after. I’ve done 50-60 hours for about that pay for most of my working life.
|
I often pull 60 hour work weeks, though I make quite a bit more than that. Most industries are not the tech or financial sector.
|
On December 21 2017 05:57 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:45 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors. They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd. They just spent 1.5 trillion on a tax cut. They couldn’t find 14 billion in there for CHIP? The problem with you’re argument is that you are operating under the assumption that we are deeply stupid. your*
|
On December 21 2017 06:07 TheLordofAwesome wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:57 Plansix wrote:On December 21 2017 05:45 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:35 Gorsameth wrote:On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If they wanted to fund it then it would never have lapsed in the first place. "we cant afford to help millions of sick children, I need to give my donor a tax cut" that is literally what they are saying when they cant find the money for CHIP but pass a tax cut for themselves and their rich donors. They did find it, Democrats rejected that method. Haggling on where money comes from is normal. The idea that the program going to go away is absurd. They just spent 1.5 trillion on a tax cut. They couldn’t find 14 billion in there for CHIP? The problem with you’re argument is that you are operating under the assumption that we are deeply stupid. your* Harsh, but fair.
|
On December 21 2017 05:59 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:24 Mohdoo wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? What in gods name do you do for a living? Seriously, this is super common. Both as a paid hourly with overtime and off-the-books only first 8 hours are paid, but you lose the job if you don’t help out after. I’ve done 50-60 hours for about that pay for most of my working life.
Christ. Make me sound like an utterly spoiled baby. I get whiny when I even approach 48 hours a week lolol. I've probably worked a 50 hour week 2 or 3 times in my (short) career.
|
On December 21 2017 05:26 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:24 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:22 Introvert wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? You could check some rough calculators that news places like the NYT have. On December 21 2017 05:18 brian wrote:On December 21 2017 05:10 Introvert wrote:Looks like it's time to post this. Late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Dec. 11 stepped out of his comedic role and offered a commentary on the reauthorization of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, after introducing his son Billy, who has a serious heart issue. His presentation was a bit one-sided, and readers requested a fact check. It’s often difficult to describe Washington sausage-making in shorthand, and Kimmel fell short in several areas, appearing to pin most of the blame on Republicans — even though he was careful not to mention party affiliation.
So, in the video above and the text below, we offer a quick guide to his rhetoric. Since this is akin to a round-up, we’re not awarding Pinocchios.
***
About 1 in 8 children are covered only by CHIP, and it’s not controversial. It’s not a partisan thing. In fact, the last time funding for CHIP was authorized was in 2015. It passed with a vote of 392 to 37 in the House and 92 to 8 in the Senate. Overwhelmingly, Democrats and Republicans supported it. Until now.
Support for CHIP remains bipartisan. Kimmel starts to go off the rails by suggesting that support is no longer bipartisan.
The federal fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, which is why funding technically ran out when CHIP was not reauthorized. But states may continue to spend unspent 2017 allotments and funds from earlier years. Only three states and the District were projected to exhaust their funds by the end of December; more than half the states would run out of funds if fiscal year 2018 funding is not set by the end of March. That’s the kind of deadline that focuses the attention of lawmakers.
In any case, the stopgap spending bill approved in early December included a provision that permits the Department of Health and Human Services to shift funds internally to help states whose CHIP programs are running out of money. Congressional leaders are expected to continue negotiating a long-term reauthorization of the program in the coming weeks.
Now CHIP has become a bargaining chip. It’s on the back burner while they work out their new tax plans, which means parents of children with cancer, diabetes and heart problems are about to get letters saying their coverage could be cut off next month. Merry Christmas, right?
Kimmel falsely suggests that CHIP has become bargaining chip as part of the negotiations over the tax plan. It’s actually part of the usual year-end negotiations in Congress. Few lawmakers are really against CHIP; the question is how to fund it.
The GOP-led House of Representatives on Nov. 3 passed a CHIP reauthorization bill by a vote of 242-174, with most Democrats voting against it because of funding offsets. In particular, they objected to shortening the grace period for Obamacare enrollees who fail to make premium payments. House Republicans have complained that Democrats have not countered with their own funding proposals, while Democrats have said offsets should not be necessary when the tax bills will add to the federal budget deficit. They have instead pushed for a “clean bill” rather than one with “poison pills.”
The Senate Finance Committee in October approved its own version of the CHIP funding extension, but agreement has not been reached on how to fund it. Still, it’s quite possible a deal will be reached before Christmas. Lawmakers want to leave town before then.
just some excerpts from this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/12/13/fact-checking-jimmy-kimmel-on-chip-funding/ is your expectation that they’ll find the money to fund CHIP for the next fiscal year? (lol) You don't? They all WANT to fund it. idk if you’ve been paying attention, but they just passed a massive tax cut. you think, while preparing to strip away the ACA and killing medicare and medicaid, that they’ll find money for CHIP? or that they even want it? good one. You need the cartoon villain version of Republicans out of your head. Of course it will be funded. We can both wait and see. If you want a useful political model that actually allows you to predict outcomes, then viewing republicans as a cartoonishly evil, malicious, nihilistic, corrupt organization, whose ultimate goal is to reinstate some version of feudalism, will be much more accurate than viewing them as trustworthy center-right conservatives who care about the nation and the budget. If you are wedded to a particularly flattering representation of precisely the group of people who are 90% responsible for government corruption, cruelty and malfunctioning, then you are going to be wrong almost all of the time. But as always, no amount of evidence will change your mind.
|
|
Crony Capitalism at it's finest.
|
On December 21 2017 06:10 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2017 05:59 Danglars wrote:On December 21 2017 05:24 Mohdoo wrote:On December 21 2017 05:13 Emnjay808 wrote: As someone who works 60hrs a week and only nets 40k/yr does this tax overhaul thing help me? What in gods name do you do for a living? Seriously, this is super common. Both as a paid hourly with overtime and off-the-books only first 8 hours are paid, but you lose the job if you don’t help out after. I’ve done 50-60 hours for about that pay for most of my working life. Christ. Make me sound like an utterly spoiled baby. I get whiny when I even approach 48 hours a week lolol. I've probably worked a 50 hour week 2 or 3 times in my (short) career. Depends largely on circumstances, but 60 hour work weeks at barely-above-minimum-wage jobs (and no overtime) are usually:
1) Working multiple jobs. 2) Shitty but few alternatives. 3) Bottom-rung with future carrot.
|
On December 21 2017 06:14 Plansix wrote:Crony Capitalism at it's finest.
I see it as two parts. One, it is nice for their workers, 1k is 1k and that is nothing to be sad about. Two, with coming out and praising trump and giving him a PR win I bet that merger goes through
|
atleast thats 1 company giving it to its employee's and not just the upper management.
|
Compared to all the stock buybacks going on, that's chump change.
|
On December 21 2017 06:16 IyMoon wrote:I see it as two parts. One, it is nice for their workers, 1k is 1k and that is nothing to be sad about. Two, with coming out and praising trump and giving him a PR win I bet that merger goes through Which is crony capitalism.
|
|
|
|