As our rich got richer, our country got poorer. Trump loves the rich.

Wordslinger wrote:Masquerading as a working-man's populist during his ongoing campaign, Trump's words are one thing and his actions another.

His proposed healthcare and tax cut programs give the rich MORE and MORE, while stealing it all from the rest of us.

Trump's promises are as credible as his marriage vows to all his wives.

Reality.

Wordslinger wrote:Masquerading as a working-man's populist during his ongoing campaign, Trump's words are one thing and his actions another.

His proposed healthcare and tax cut programs give the rich MORE and MORE, while stealing it all from the rest of us.

Trump's promises are as credible as his marriage vows to all his wives.

Reality.

Wordslinger wrote:You're right. What I said was we were presented corruption vs. insanity, and obviously we chose insanity.  I also said that whichever of these two won, we the people would be the loser.  Hillary's adamant stand for keeping corporate support and voicing a campaign that mostly insulted Trump, brought her own demise.  What the country didn't want was more of the same -- which is exactly what Hillary represented.

Bernie was my man then, and now.

Sal wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:You're right. What I said was we were presented corruption vs. insanity, and obviously we chose insanity.  I also said that whichever of these two won, we the people would be the loser.  Hillary's adamant stand for keeping corporate support and voicing a campaign that mostly insulted Trump, brought her own demise.  What the country didn't want was more of the same -- which is exactly what Hillary represented.

Bernie was my man then, and now.

Hillary would've protected and expanded the ACA ...

... you should start and end right there.

Wordslinger wrote:

Sal wrote:

Wordslinger wrote:You're right. What I said was we were presented corruption vs. insanity, and obviously we chose insanity.  I also said that whichever of these two won, we the people would be the loser.  Hillary's adamant stand for keeping corporate support and voicing a campaign that mostly insulted Trump, brought her own demise.  What the country didn't want was more of the same -- which is exactly what Hillary represented.

Bernie was my man then, and now.

Hillary would've protected and expanded the ACA ...

... you should start and end right there.

Just what does beating a dead horse bring you?  Hillary is no longer relevant.  Bernie and Warren are the most popular politicians in America right now.  And the republicans own the White House, and both houses in congress.

Fact:  Hillary was crooked as hell and Trump is insane.  

Reality.

Sal wrote:
Hillary would've protected and expanded the ACA ...
... you should start and end right there.

del.capslock wrote:

Doubtless she would have. Wanna know why?

2seaoat wrote:Bernie was my man then, and now.

  This is on Bernie and the Fuzzy thinking which attacked Hillary Clinton as just one more Wall street shill.   She was not.  

del.capslock wrote:

Sal wrote:
Hillary would've protected and expanded the ACA ...
... you should start and end right there.

Doubtless she would have. Wanna know why?

Because the Clintons and their DNC toadies are all pawns of Wall Street and insurance, as a financial intermediary, is an integral part of the Wall Street criminal enterprise--see AIG.

Obamacare should rightly be called the Health Insurance Profit Protection and Enhancement Act. according to Wendell Potter in this article: http://inthesetimes.com/article/19997/trumpcare-insurance-the-american-health-care-act

She would have opposed with her dying breath public insurance or single-payer which are the real solutions to our healthcare problems, not more give-aways to insurance companies.

You have to ask yourself why every state has an Insurance Commissioner or the equivalent.  It's because, since Colonial times, it's been well know that Insurance companies are inherently crooked and will stop at nothing to screw their customers. And Hillary is part of that screwing...   and not the good part, either.

Floridatexan wrote:
What does AIG have to do with the Clintons?

2seaoat wrote:I am a Republican.  I think forgiving student loans is stupid.  I have many answers for student loans.  Limit Student loans to 15k a year with low interest loans.   After the first 15k let a student get student loans which can be discharged in Bankruptcy and do not have low interest rates.   I paid every dime of my education by working as my mother was widowed when I was 10.  I walked in my Freshman year in college and paid all my room and board for the year, and tuition with one check which I earned.  I paid the second year, and graduated with a BA in 2.5 years owing not one dime to anybody.  My daughter who is in the SA office has a fellow young attorney who has 200k in student loans as it financed her lifestyle for seven years while getting her ba and law degree.   I have zero sympathy for these folks.   You go to a junior college, or like I did after I graduated early, I worked for nine months to pay for my graduate school, and post graduate studies.  

I cleaned bathrooms, read water meters, bartended, worked as a machinist, worked in a warehouse, dishwashing, landscaped, and worked on automobile car lots all through high school to pay for my college, and I learned just as much working and saving as I did in the classroom.   Fuzzy thinking gets monsters like President Trump who just like Bernie want to GIVE something away to his voters.   Total BS.  Bernie voters who wanted something for nothing put Trump in office as wealthy people are now getting something for nothing.......I want folks elected who ask what will you do for this country, not looking to get something for nothing.

2seaoat wrote:I am a Republican.  I think forgiving student loans is stupid.  I have many answers for student loans.  Limit Student loans to 15k a year with low interest loans.   After the first 15k let a student get student loans which can be discharged in Bankruptcy and do not have low interest rates.   I paid every dime of my education by working as my mother was widowed when I was 10.  I walked in my Freshman year in college and paid all my room and board for the year, and tuition with one check which I earned.  I paid the second year, and graduated with a BA in 2.5 years owing not one dime to anybody.  My daughter who is in the SA office has a fellow young attorney who has 200k in student loans as it financed her lifestyle for seven years while getting her ba and law degree.   I have zero sympathy for these folks.   You go to a junior college, or like I did after I graduated early, I worked for nine months to pay for my graduate school, and post graduate studies.  

I cleaned bathrooms, read water meters, bartended, worked as a machinist, worked in a warehouse, dishwashing, landscaped, and worked on automobile car lots all through high school to pay for my college, and I learned just as much working and saving as I did in the classroom.   Fuzzy thinking gets monsters like President Trump who just like Bernie want to GIVE something away to his voters.   Total BS.  Bernie voters who wanted something for nothing put Trump in office as wealthy people are now getting something for nothing.......I want folks elected who ask what will you do for this country, not looking to get something for nothing.

2seaoat wrote:The path is different because in the sixties state tuitions were low.   Instead of talking about forgiving student loans, the emphasis should be more federal dollars in state grants to lower tuition.   Sorry, I do know people who still do it the old fashioned way.   Both my kids got scholarships and worked with only a little help from us.  They did get student loans for my daughter's law school, but that was 30k as she worked all during college and law school.   Sorry, appealing to rich people to give them a tax break, or appealing to young people to forgive their student loans is BS.   We need folks who can set bipartisan budgets which improve our investments in education, training, and jobs.   I personally know that lawyer with the 200k loan, and she lived for seven years on loans without working a day of her life, and now with a 70k a year job she cannot pay back those loans without being an indentured servant for the next 30 years.   It is not forgiving student loans, but reducing the pipeline of student loans with a bifurcation of all loans......some with low interest.   some with ordinary rates which can be discharged in bankruptcy.

I think the biggest problem facing America is the hysteria of the left and the right.   WE NEED MIDDLE.

Floridatexan wrote:Hillary Clinton tried to pass health care for all in 1993.  She was vilified for it, not only by the opponents of her bill, but for stepping outside the boundaries of her duties as First Lady.  I am so sick of hearing from people who should know better, about the "corruption" of the Clintons.  You have bought into the lies that followed them throughout Bill's presidency and still persist to this day.  I would estimate that 90% of the stories about them are false...straight out of fairyland.  

2seaoat wrote:
    Forgiving student loans was dead from the git go.   Tell me how you are going to fund block grants to states for lowering tuition, and I will listen, but that is a bipartisan approach which would restrict more philosophers for vocational talents which may involve an IT degree and the skills to build a database.  

del.capslock wrote:

2seaoat wrote:
    Forgiving student loans was dead from the git go.   Tell me how you are going to fund block grants to states for lowering tuition, and I will listen, but that is a bipartisan approach which would restrict more philosophers for vocational talents which may involve an IT degree and the skills to build a database.  

Forgiving student loans was an entirely practical idea and could have been easily accomplished.

Do you realize that at the beginning of the foreclosure crisis, the Boston Fed proposed a much cheaper solution than bailing out the banks but it was rejected by the government?

I dare you to read this article. Remember that the Treasury Secretary was Hank Paulson, a former Chairman of Goldman.

The US government saved the "too big to fail" banks in 2008. The reason? People were unable to pay their mortgages causing the banks billions in losses. The US Government authorized $700 billion to save the banks. The Federal Reserve Bank also gave them short-term loans that were even larger.

According to a report of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, there was another way. Why not save the people who were at risk? If the people were helped, they would be able to pay their mortgages, the banks would not have needed to be rescued and the financial crisis would have been considerably less severe. The cost? They calculated up to $50 Billion dollars overall - less than 10% of what was approved for banks.

http://necsi.edu/news/2011/bailouts.html