placeholder

Got any actual data to back that claim up? And if so, what percentage?

Your question was ambiguous. I thought you were referring to Obamacare not to private employer plans. As for the answer to what I now understand to be your question: An employer has the option to let you out of their plan. But an employee cannot on their own decide to opt out. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/hr-qa/pages/insuranceoptout.aspx As for your baiting speculations about my personal life, if they're not getting any stupider, it's only because they've pretty much hit rock bottom.

As per usual, you indulge in stupid, pointless personal baiting. As for your first question: "The most legally and politically controversial aspect of the ACA, the individual mandate requires Americans to purchase health insurance or face a government penalty, with some exceptions—particularly for low-income individuals who cannot afford to buy insurance [3]. The individual mandate has been considered necessary to cover the cost of U.S. health care. Without a mandate, fewer healthy people would pay into the system to counterbalance the cost associated with care for the sick. The healthy, mostly younger people would be able to “free ride,“ purchasing health insurance only when they got sick, after paying little or nothing up front when their use of services was lower [4, 5]." https://journalofethics.ama-assn.org/article/constitutionality-affordable-care-act-update/2012-11

Well, how about a piece of evidence that's actually checkable? As for your claims about rate increases: "Federal rules allow insurers to charge older adults (e.g., in their sixties) up to three times the premium they would charge younger adults (e.g., in their early twenties). This limit on age rating applies to all non-group and small-group health insurance policies, whether sold in the Marketplace or outside of the Marketplace. Some states prohibit insurers from adjusting premiums for age or limit the age adjustment to less than three-to-one. https://www.kff.org/faqs/faqs-health-insurance-marketplace-and-the-aca/can-be-charged-more-because-of-my-age/ Get back to me when you have some confirmable evidence to offer.

Wrong again: "A record 16.3 million people flocked to the Affordable Care Act exchanges for 2023 coverage, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said Wednesday... Sign-ups on the federal exchange, healthcare.gov, have skyrocketed nearly 50% since the Biden administration took office in 2021, thanks in large part to enhanced federal premium subsidies and increased outreach efforts." https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/25/politics/aca-enrollment-2023/index.html#:~:text=Sign-ups for ACA coverage have soared under President Joe Biden.&text=A record 16.3 million people,and Medicaid Services said Wednesday.

Let's start out with this: "supposedly ins. co. can't cancel you, supposedly, but false, they still will" Got any actual evidence to support that claim?

Well, you keep on repeating the same stuff about anti-semitism being based on the Koran and Islam when history shows that's not the case.

I believe that one reason for the massive level of bombing is to force many or even most Gazans to move elsewhere. Not sure that any Mideast government wants to receive them. So it's not so much a plan as it is a kind of hope.

Whereas your comments are an unceasing font of originality?

People will use whatever issues they can when fighting off what they see as unjust treatment based on religion, race, or ethnicity,. This goes for South African blacks, Algerians, Kenyans, Native Americans etc. Even if it the case that Muslins cite this as a reason to oppose Israel, that wouldn't be anti-Semitism. Just anti-otherism. And while there's a legend that Mohammed ascended to Heaven from where the Dome of the Rock is now located, that's doesn't appear in the Koran. And Mohammed never lived in what is Israel however it's defined. He spent his whole life in Saudi Arabia. That doesn't mean that some Muslims don't believe otherwise.

So much ignorance on display. Jewish and Christian communities in much of the Muslim world thrived for 1500 years. In fact, Jews generally fared a lot better in Muslim lands than they did in Christian Europe. And even where they were treated badly by Muslims, as were Christians, they weren't demonized by Muslims the way they were in Europe. There was no blood libel, no blame for Jews killing Jesus etc. Why do you feel compelled to advertise your ignorance?

One has to be astonishingly ignorant of the Israeli rule in the West Bank and Gaza to believe that Palestinian hatred of Israel is based on anti-semitism. There's no doubt that anti-semitism is prevalent in the community. But, as I pointed out to you before, and to no avail, the Palestinians have plenty of reasons for hating Israel that have nothing to do with it being a Jewish country.

Actually, for whatever his opinion is worth, Chomsky actually says that the situation in the West Bank is worse than apartheid. “In the Occupied Territories, what Israel is doing is much worse than apartheid,” Chomsky says. “To call it apartheid is a gift to Israel, at least if by 'apartheid' you mean South African-style apartheid. What’s happening in the Occupied Territories is much worse. There’s a crucial difference. The South African Nationalists needed the black population. That was their workforce. … The Israeli relationship to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is totally different. They just don’t want them. They want them out, or at least in prison.” https://www.democracynow.org/2014/8/8/noam_chomsky_what_israel_is_doing

Given * a bombing policy that even the Biden administration thinks is way over the top, you think a charge of ethnic cleansing is presumptively invalid? Allow me to acquaint you with the definition of ethnic cleansing "Ethnic cleansing is the systematic forced removal of ethnic, racial, or religious groups from a given area, with the intent of making a region ethnically homogeneous." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing#:~:text=Ethnic cleansing is the systematic,making a region ethnically homogeneous.

Impossible to know for sure. But given that there were lots of Israeli soldiers there as witnesses, I suspect that the IDF is reporting this incident honestly. Not because it believes in being honest, but because there would be no way to suppress the truth.

"Fending off the IDG" ? What actions have the Israelis taken against the Houthis that make "fending off" necessary?

Most likely Israel held its hands up and admitted wrong doing because there was no way that this story could be suppressed. Too many Israeli soldiers witnessed the event and would feel compelled to inform the families of the hostages what had occurred. On the other hand, I doubt that Israeli soldiers are going to feel compelled to report on similar incidents that may have occurred where the victims were Palestinians. Keep in mind that a major motivation for the incursion is vengeance. And most reporters have fled Gaza. Not without reason. Reuters, AFP Say Israeli Tank Responsible for Deadly Attack on Journalists Reuters and Agence France-Presse have each published an investigation into an October attack in southern Lebanon that killed a journalist and injured six others, saying their findings indicate the group was hit by Israeli tank rounds... Reuters and AFP said the journalists were clearly identified as members of the press wearing flak jackets and helmets. An initial tank round struck the group, followed quickly by a second, the news agencies said. Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah was killed, while two of his Reuters colleagues and an AFP journalist were among those hurt. https://www.voanews.com/a/reuters-afp-says-israeli-tank-responsible-for-deadly-attack-on-journalists/7387933.html In fact, the Israeli govt has alleged that journalists in Gaza were actually working with Hamas including journalists working for the the NY Times, Reuters and AP. Israel Accuses Freelance Photographers of Advance Knowledge of Oct. 7 Attack The Israeli government on Thursday accused freelance photographers for several major news organizations, including The New York Times, of being “accomplices” in the killing and abductions of Israeli soldiers and civilians by Hamas fighters — an allegation The Times vigorously denied about its freelancer. The government seized on a report by a pro-Israel media watchdog group, Honest Reporting, which has long accused The Times and other news organizations of anti-Israel bias in their coverage of Israel’s conflict with the Palestinians. “These journalists were accomplices in crimes against humanity,” the public diplomacy department of the prime minister’s office said in a tersely worded statement. “Their actions were contrary to professional ethics.” https://archive.ph/edQYa https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/09/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-hamas-photographers.html

Well, they're really voting for the fact that the Fed signaled it won't raise interest rates. Many economists disagreed with the harshness of the Fed's interest rate policy. In fact, it looks more and more that, as many economist argued, the sharp rise in inflation was due to supply disruptions because of the Covid pandemic.

The reason for the mandatory membership in Obamacare is the same reason that you don't get to choose to opt out of an employer health insurance program. It was felt that the young and healthy would eschew signing up until they got older and more ill. It's an issue called community rating. As it turns out, Obamacare is so highly desired that record numbers are now enrolled in it. As for not being allowed to know the true cost of one's medication, what has that got to do with Obamacare? What's more, it's true it was sponsored by Senator Collins of Maine, one of the few moderate Republicans left in the Senate. That's because at the time the Senate was controlled by the Republicans. What's also true is that all except 2 senators supported the bill. By the way, those 2 senators who voted against Collins' bill were Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky, 2 of the most conservative senators. You may recall that Susan Collins was one of the 3 Republican Senators who torpedoed Trump's attempt to cancel Obamacare. You want to give her a pat on the back for that, too?

It was, I thought, obviously irony. Still, irony with a point. And maybe you should direct your complaints about fentanyl to the Chinese government. Most of the precursors to fentanyl come from China. The Chinese are doing a roaring trade with the Mexican cartels. China's Role in the Fentanyl Crisis https://www.brookings.edu/articles/chinas-role-in-the-fentanyl-crisis/

Mort Sahl once remarked of a famous and politically controversial actor, that it was possible to dislike her for herself. Even if anti-semitism wasn't a thing among the Palestinians, they would still have plenty of reasons to hate Israel.

Here's a good take on the emptiness of the Republican impeachment efforts: Here’s how dishonest James Comer’s Biden allegations are Over the past 24 hours, with a vote to formalize the impeachment investigation into President Biden looming in the House, Republican lawmakers have been pressed to identify what, exactly, they think Biden did. After all, a lot of Republicans — including Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) — have publicly rejected the idea that evidence implicating Biden in wrongdoing exists. https://archive.ph/M3TrU https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/14/biden-impeachment-inquiry-comer-evidence/

In fact Trump was so disturbed by the invasion of the Capitol that he sat before the TV as though transfixed according to those present in the White House. So disturbed was he that he refused to call in the National Guard, even though, before the Capitol was invaded, the protestors called for lynching Mike Pence, who was in the Capitol. And Trump showed on consciousness of guilt by lying afterwards and claiming that he hadn't watched the invasion of the Capitol.

Do I really have to point out how nonsensical his claim is? He claims that no matter what the disagreement is about, a handful of posters scream racist. This is just plain over-the-top nuts. It's certainly not the kind of language that reflects rational thinking.

" Now it's essentially a handful of prolific posters screaming racist at everyone they disagree with and liking each others posts." Maybe this strikes you as being thoughtful and cogent. Me, not so much.