The US Healthcare Mass Debate

[pErvinalia]

If the deal was related only to covering the poor, then we'd just fucking raise the income level at which someone is entitled to Medicaid, or do a means-tested subsidy. But you will notice that they didn't do that.

Bullshit.

"Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act"

[The ACA] modifies how income is calculated for most Medicaid applicants, including those in the new eligibility group. Starting in 2014, states must use Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) for eligibility determination for most applicants. This is adjusted gross income as defined in the Internal Revenue Code, modified by applying a 5 percent “disregard.” This method eliminates resource tests. The combined effect of requiring coverage up to 133 percent of poverty and then use of MAGI budgeting effectively raises the income level for most Medicaid applicants to 138 percent of poverty.

[Emphasis mine.]

Loving your work, L'Emmy. I'm glad someone has the energy to debunk FortyTwo's seemingly never ending stream of nonsense.

Look, if Medicaid was raised to cover the 12,000,000 who did not have affordable options before....what was the need for individual mandate and the quadrupling of insurance rates? Why not just cover the fucking poor and leave it at that? That was the point I was making. If you want to give poor people food stamps or a stipend to pay for food, you give them the fucking money -- you don't impose a national program that requires everyone, even those who can afford their own food, to participate.

I doubt anyone here disagrees with that. Not sure what that has to do with you peddling falsehoods.

[pErvinalia]

You're only saying that coz she's Black.

She identifies as a Native American who identifies as black.

Anyone who won't at least say: "On the native American claim, Elizabeth Warren is full of crap" is exposing his bias.

Why would anyone bother? It's got nothing to do with anything.

No Republican would be allowed to get away with that shit here without it being called out and to become the subject of ridicule, laughter and scorn, and rightly so. But, because it's Warren, we have posts about how there isn't any proof she's "not" Native American.

No, we have those posts because you made a claim that you can't possibly back up. And instead of admitting that you can't, as usual you go off on tangents and red herrings in an attempt to avoid taking responsibility for what you actually said.

[Forty Two]

Ugh, I'm so sick of your shit. You can't discuss anything without your usual sniping. I'm not being dishonest, and nobody "debunked" what I said.

I did not make a claim I "can't possibly back up." The claim I mad was that she's not Native American because there is no evidence to show she's native American. To be an ethnicity, you have to have ancestry that makes you that ethnicity. If you have no identifiable ancestor(s) in a given ethnicity, then you're not that ethnicity.

Elizabeth Warren made a claim she can't back up. She said she's Native American, and she can't back up that claim. Do you admit that?

She claims to be Cherokee - the documentation of Cherokees was extensive and exhaustive. Censuses were conducted, heads were counted, names were recorded, birth and marriage and death were noted — bureaucracy was part of the Indian management and removal process 175 years ago. And, the Cherokee, who had their own alphabet, were keeping their own records. There are 30 rolls made of Cherokees between 1817 and 1914 and there were extensive records created by colonials, missionaries, U.S. officials, schools, travelers and newspapers that trace Cherokee ancestries to the mid-1700s. Much of this paper trail was created by the tribe itself. If an ancestor’s name can’t be located in those documents, there is slim to no chance that you're a Cherokee. Yet, it's fashionable, and has been for many decades, for white people to claim some ancient, undocumented, connection to the Cherokee tribe, and it's supposed to create a southern-white "cred" to say you're mammaw and pappaw said that their mammaw and pappaw was 1/4 Cherokee. But, if you have no identifiable "reds" in your background, then claiming to be an Indian is like Rachel Dolezel claiming to "identify" as black.

[rainbow]

To be an ethnicity, you have to have ancestry that makes you that ethnicity.

Pure Bollocks.

You again confuse ethnicity with race.

Please get it right.

It is getting really boring correcting you every time.

Ethnicity is based on culture and group acceptance, and may involve ancestry.

Race is supposedly based on ancestry, but due to the fact that your ancestors double at each generation going back, any meaningful scientific definition can be ruled out.

It really isn't that complicated.

Please try harder.

[pErvinalia]

Ugh, I'm so sick of your shit.

No, we're sick of your shit. What the hell is wrong with with you that you can pretty much never admit that you are wrong?

I did not make a claim I "can't possibly back up." The claim I mad was that she's not Native American because there is no evidence to show she's native American.

As if it's not bad enough that you can't admit you were wrong, you now move on to telling a lie. You didn't in fact make a claim that she's not Native American because there is no evidence to show that. What you did was state that her claim was false. That's a (negative) truth statement. Yet you can not possibly know that her claim that she might be (or is) a Native American is false. You can assert that it might be false, but that's not what you said. You said IT WAS false.

To be an ethnicity, you have to have ancestry that makes you that ethnicity. If you have no identifiable ancestor(s) in a given ethnicity, then you're not that ethnicity.

WTF?! A person's ethnicity is ONLY dependant on their actual ethnicity. Whether that person can show any identifiable ancestor(s) is irrelevant.

Elizabeth Warren made a claim she can't back up. She said she's Native American, and she can't back up that claim. Do you admit that?

I don't know what exactly she has claimed, and I couldn't give a shit. It's got nothing to do with anything and I don't care whether she is or isn't Native American.

[Forty Two]

To be an ethnicity, you have to have ancestry that makes you that ethnicity.

Pure Bollocks.

You again confuse ethnicity with race.

Please get it right.

It is getting really boring correcting you every time.

Ethnicity is based on culture and group acceptance, and may involve ancestry.

The claim is her native American ethnicity or race - her heritage - her status as a Cherokee. She claims to be native American and she is not, because she cannot show a single person in her family that is or was native American.

I am not going to argue about the definition of "ethnicity" vs. "race" because what we're talking about is "Native American." If you want to refer to that as a race, fine. If you want to refer to it as an ethnicity, fine. When I referred to her ethnicity and about claims to being an ethnicity, I'm talking about, specifically, this instance, and nothing else - she's not a Cherokee. She is not native American. She is a White, Anglo Saxon, who said she's part Cherokee. She's not.

Race is supposedly based on ancestry, but due to the fact that your ancestors double at each generation going back, any meaningful scientific definition can be ruled out.

It really isn't that complicated.

Please try harder.

It's not that complicated, right. "This" - the fact that she is not Native American, Cherokee or otherwise, is very simple. What's weird is how hard some of you are trying to, just, simply, admit it. It's all about how we can't "prove" that she's not native American. It's all about how there is no meaningful scientific definition of race, but even though we have to rule out any meaningful definition of race, it's "really not that complicated." LOL

Look - she's not Native American, right? I mean, when someone can't show that they're Mongolian, if they go around saying my meemaw and great uncle pappy said that their grandmammy said that her uncle married a Mongolian girl - that don't make them Mongolian. So, when you go around saying you're Cherokee, and that meemaw and pappaw used to say that they heard from their grandparents that there was a Cherokee in the mix, but there is no indication of that, you're family fucking lore don't make you Cherokee.

It really is that simple, but if you want to explain to me how Warren can reasonably say she's Native American....by all means, have the fuck at it.

[pErvinalia]

To be an ethnicity, you have to have ancestry that makes you that ethnicity.

Pure Bollocks.

You again confuse ethnicity with race.

Please get it right.

It is getting really boring correcting you every time.

Ethnicity is based on culture and group acceptance, and may involve ancestry.

The claim is her native American ethnicity or race - her heritage - her status as a Cherokee. She claims to be native American and she is not, because she cannot show a single person in her family that is or was native American.

You are doing it again. You can't possibly know that she's not a Native American.

Race is supposedly based on ancestry, but due to the fact that your ancestors double at each generation going back, any meaningful scientific definition can be ruled out.

It really isn't that complicated.

Please try harder.

It's not that complicated, right. "This" - the fact that she is not Native American, Cherokee or otherwise, is very simple. What's weird is how hard some of you are trying to, just, simply, admit it. It's all about how we can't "prove" that she's not native American. It's all about how there is no meaningful scientific definition of race, but even though we have to rule out any meaningful definition of race, it's "really not that complicated." LOL

It's because no one other than you and a coterie of rwnj (and probably some Native Americans) cares about this. Whether she is or isn't native American is utterly unimportant to us.

[Forty Two]

You are doing it again. You can't possibly know that she's not a Native American.

Look it's not me that's saying it. It's every genealogist that has looked into it and heads of Cherokee tribes. She's not fucking Cherokee, which is what she said she was. And, she's not Native American because she doesn't have native American ancestry. Her family lore is insufficient to show she is Native American.

We know she's not Native American the same way we know she's not Mongolian. She has no such ancestry, and if her meemaw said there was a Mongolian bride she'd heard about, that wouldn't change a thing.

And, shove your "You're doing it again" up you ass. God, man you are painful.

Race is supposedly based on ancestry, but due to the fact that your ancestors double at each generation going back, any meaningful scientific definition can be ruled out.

It really isn't that complicated.

Please try harder.

It's not that complicated, right. "This" - the fact that she is not Native American, Cherokee or otherwise, is very simple. What's weird is how hard some of you are trying to, just, simply, admit it. It's all about how we can't "prove" that she's not native American. It's all about how there is no meaningful scientific definition of race, but even though we have to rule out any meaningful definition of race, it's "really not that complicated." LOL

It's because no one other than you and a coterie of rwnj (and probably some Native Americans) cares about this. Whether she is or isn't native American is utterly unimportant to us.

I don't care what's important to you. Of course it's not important to you. You know, if you were the least bit honest, that you'd be having a field day with this if it was Sarah Palin, or Mit Romney, or some other Republican, who tried to claim native american ancestry because their grandmother said some ancestor was 1/4 Cherokee. You know it. I know it. Everyone else knows it. This is just an example of you showing your true colors.

She's not Cherokee. She's not Native American. Nothing she says is any evidence of her being either of those. Can't you just say "yes, I agree, there is no evidence that she's native American" - feel free to add that you don't care one way or the other. But, whether you "care" is irrelevant.

The fact that it is this hard, on such a simple, straightforward issue, to get you and some others to just admit that if the same shit was trying to be sold by Scott Brown, or some GOP candidate, you'd not be making these same deflections and defenses. You'd be rightfully skewering them. Just admit it.

[Brian Peacock]

You're only saying that coz she's Black.

She identifies as a Native American who identifies as black.

Anyone who won't at least say: "On the native American claim, Elizabeth Warren is full of crap" is exposing his bias. No Republican would be allowed to get away with that shit here without it being called out and to become the subject of ridicule, laughter and scorn, and rightly so. But, because it's Warren, we have posts about how there isn't any proof she's "not" Native American. And, articles in The Atlantic and such take her familial lore claim seriously, and point out that the real, important issue is not that she lied and is full of crap, but that there really isn't any evidence that she for sure got a career boost from making the claim. She made the claim, she published it, she worked under the rubric of being a minority, native American professor at Harvard, but we can't prove she was given advancement just because of that claim. Lol. That's the important issue. I'm sure it would be the important issue if Trump, or Ted Cruz or whoever, made a similar claim.

Yeah, but you're only saying that because she's a woman!

[pErvinalia]

You are doing it again. You can't possibly know that she's not a Native American.

Look it's not me that's saying it. It's every genealogist that has looked into it and heads of Cherokee tribes.

Again with your historical revisionism. You said she's not Native American "because she cannot show a single person in her family that is or was native American". You've now moved the goalposts to someone else making a claim.

And, shove your "You're doing it again" up you ass. God, man you are painful.

Stop being dishonest and/or retarded and I'll stop saying it.

Race is supposedly based on ancestry, but due to the fact that your ancestors double at each generation going back, any meaningful scientific definition can be ruled out.

It really isn't that complicated.

Please try harder.

It's not that complicated, right. "This" - the fact that she is not Native American, Cherokee or otherwise, is very simple. What's weird is how hard some of you are trying to, just, simply, admit it. It's all about how we can't "prove" that she's not native American. It's all about how there is no meaningful scientific definition of race, but even though we have to rule out any meaningful definition of race, it's "really not that complicated." LOL

It's because no one other than you and a coterie of rwnj (and probably some Native Americans) cares about this. Whether she is or isn't native American is utterly unimportant to us.

I don't care what's important to you.

Like fuck you don't. If you didn't care you wouldn't keep asking us to comment on an utterly inconsequential thing.

Of course it's not important to you. You know, if you were the least bit honest, that you'd be having a field day with this if it was Sarah Palin, or Mit Romney, or some other Republican, who tried to claim native american ancestry because their grandmother said some ancestor was 1/4 Cherokee. You know it. I know it. Everyone else knows it. This is just an example of you showing your true colors.

So because I'm not "having a field day" with it I can't point out where you are bullshitting? Sorry, chief, debate doesn't work like that. When you make arguments/assertions, we get to address them. You don't get to have a sook when we do that just because we didn't "have a field day" on some inconsequential issue.

She's not Cherokee. She's not Native American. Nothing she says is any evidence of her being either of those. Can't you just say "yes, I agree, there is no evidence that she's native American" - feel free to add that you don't care one way or the other. But, whether you "care" is irrelevant.

I already answered this somewhere. I don't know what her exact claim is, and I don't know what evidence there may or may not be. The reason for this is that it's an inconsequential issue and consequently I haven't found the need to care enough to look up the exact claims. Therefore I can't answer your question as to whether there is evidence of a claim or not. Can you understand?

The fact that it is this hard, on such a simple, straightforward issue, to get you and some others to just admit that if the same shit was trying to be sold by Scott Brown, or some GOP candidate, you'd not be making these same deflections and defenses. You'd be rightfully skewering them. Just admit it.

I've got no problem in admitting that I'd rubbish any politician in the right circumstances making a ridiculous claim to ancestry. But I'm not abreast of what exactly she has claimed, and I simply don't care enough to go and research it. If she has definitively claimed that she is Native American and the only evidence she had to support it was her "high cheekbones", then I would rubbish the shit out of that. Is that good enough for your ridiculous partisan nervous tic?

[L'Emmerdeur]

If the deal was related only to covering the poor, then we'd just fucking raise the income level at which someone is entitled to Medicaid, or do a means-tested subsidy. But you will notice that they didn't do that.

Bullshit.

"Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act"

[The ACA] modifies how income is calculated for most Medicaid applicants, including those in the new eligibility group. Starting in 2014, states must use Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) for eligibility determination for most applicants. This is adjusted gross income as defined in the Internal Revenue Code, modified by applying a 5 percent “disregard.” This method eliminates resource tests. The combined effect of requiring coverage up to 133 percent of poverty and then use of MAGI budgeting effectively raises the income level for most Medicaid applicants to 138 percent of poverty.

[Emphasis mine.]

You're missing the point. If the issue was to "cover the poor" then you don't have to do anything other than means test for Medicaid. If you want to cover the poor, and the poor aren't covered, then cover the poor. There is no need to upset the entire system and force people who aren't buy insurance at $x per month to buy insurance at quadruple $x per month.

The ACA should have been better in regard to making sure that poor and middle class people got affordable access to health care. In my opinion, it should have included a single payer option for everybody. On the other hand, the political calculation that a single payer option could have resulted in nothing being done at all might have been correct. Politicians, both Democratic and Republican, are all too willing to spit in the faces of their nominal constituencies if those politicians are beholden to a particular interests, and many of them are beholden to health insurance interests, who really don't want a single payer option.

Regardless, your assertion that 'they' didn't 'fucking raise the income level at which someone is entitled to Medicaid' is false.

[Forty Two]

You are doing it again. You can't possibly know that she's not a Native American.

Look it's not me that's saying it. It's every genealogist that has looked into it and heads of Cherokee tribes.

Again with your historical revisionism. You said she's not Native American "because she cannot show a single person in her family that is or was native American". You've now moved the goalposts to someone else making a claim.

Stop it, dude. Just stop it. The goalposts have not been moved. She's not native American because there is no evidence that she's native American. The same way it is known that she's not Mongolian or Chinese or Japanese. Her family lore doesn't mean shit. Got it? In addition, genealogists have looked into it, and she cannot show a single person in her family is or was Native American. That's not moving goalposts, that's explaining how it is known that she is not Native American.

She's not Native American.

But, I'll be sure to point out your standard of review here as to how we know what we know - I'll expect you to use this kind of epistemology on all issues, not just those involving claims by Elizabeth Warren that she's Native American.

You can't ever, for example, "know" that Trump is lying, right? You can't "know" that there is no significant voter fraud in the US, right? You can't "know" that Trump did not lose the popular vote because millions of illegals voted, right? You can't "know" that the investigation of Trump isn't a bogus political witch hunt, right? And you can't know that Trump didn't actually release his tax returns, right?

Like fuck you don't. If you didn't care you wouldn't keep asking us to comment on an utterly inconsequential thing.

You are not "us" -- I'm not asking you to comment on anything and given the lack of value of almost everything you post, I'd prefer you didn't. I know, of course, and you know, that you'd have no problem calling Trump out on this exact thing, if it was him. For some reason, with Warren, you can't bring yourself to say she's full of it, here. You want to keep trying to pretend that it's not known that she's white, and not a Native American. If it was a Republican, Progressives and folks like you would be accusing the claimant of racism and cultural appropriation.

Of course it's not important to you. You know, if you were the least bit honest, that you'd be having a field day with this if it was Sarah Palin, or Mit Romney, or some other Republican, who tried to claim native american ancestry because their grandmother said some ancestor was 1/4 Cherokee. You know it. I know it. Everyone else knows it. This is just an example of you showing your true colors.

So because I'm not "having a field day" with it I can't point out where you are bullshitting?

You haven't pointed out any bullshit. I'm reporting accurate facts. You're falsely claiming that I'm bullshitting to try to deflect, because you don't view her dishonesty as important. When you don't view an issue as important, you try to piss all over the conversation, deflect and derail.

Sorry, chief, debate doesn't work like that. When you make arguments/assertions, we get to address them.

You're not we. You're you. Only you. Stop pretending you speak for a group. You don't. And, you can address all you want, but when your comments are as pointless and inane as you've been making here, I'm going to point that out.

You don't get to have a sook when we do that just because we didn't "have a field day" on some inconsequential issue.

I get to do whatever I want. What you don't get to do is your usual vitriolic attacks. Given the number of them you've been hurling these days, I'm figuring at some point a moderator is going to do something to react. Usually they wait three weeks and meekly post some blurb about it, probably because they "understand" that it's pErvin and ...shhhhh...he has some "issues" you know...at least that's what I've been told. But, eventually there has to be limit on your behavior.

She's not Cherokee. She's not Native American. Nothing she says is any evidence of her being either of those. Can't you just say "yes, I agree, there is no evidence that she's native American" - feel free to add that you don't care one way or the other. But, whether you "care" is irrelevant.

I already answered this somewhere. I don't know what her exact claim is,

If you don't know what her exact claim is, how in the world are you even talking about this issue to say that it's not proven wrong?
Just your usual mindreading abilities, I guess...

and I don't know what evidence there may or may not be.

There isn't any, and you have none. She's not Native American. She has not advanced any evidence.

The reason for this is that it's an inconsequential issue and consequently I haven't found the need to care enough to look up the exact claims. Therefore I can't answer your question as to whether there is evidence of a claim or not. Can you understand?

this is all fine - except it does not explain your usual behavior here of participating in a conversation and making substantive statements about it, when you say you don't care about it. And, you've said what I can and can't know, despite having just admitted that you know something between jack and squat about it.

You just want to be contrary, claim the issue is inconsequential, and pretend that it's not known that Warren is not Native American, although she claimed to be that. If you were honest, you'd say "I don't know one way or the other, and I don't care." But instead you tell me that I don't know one way or the other, and that you don't care. That's a different thing altogether.

The fact that it is this hard, on such a simple, straightforward issue, to get you and some others to just admit that if the same shit was trying to be sold by Scott Brown, or some GOP candidate, you'd not be making these same deflections and defenses. You'd be rightfully skewering them. Just admit it.

I've got no problem in admitting that I'd rubbish any politician in the right circumstances making a ridiculous claim to ancestry. But I'm not abreast of what exactly she has claimed, and I simply don't care enough to go and research it. If she has definitively claimed that she is Native American and the only evidence she had to support it was her "high cheekbones", then I would rubbish the shit out of that. Is that good enough for your ridiculous partisan nervous tic?

So then don't fucking sit there and tell me what I do or do not know. I have researched the issue, and I have posted information about it. So, instead of telling me what you think "I" know, just say "I, pErvin, don't know, haven't looked into it, and don't care." Just because you don't know and don't care, doesn't mean the issue is reasonably debatable. It just means you're ignorant of the facts.

It's your partisan bullshit, pErvin, not mine. She has definitely claimed that she is Native American, and it was published in her Harvard bio where she was described as a minority, Native American professor. And, the only evidence she's ever put forward is the family lore and high cheekbones nonsense. But, instead of looking into it yourself, or instead of just not participating in the conversation, you went ahead to try to tell me that "I" didn't know that she wasn't Native American and "I" could not prove she wasn't Native American. Now you're just trying to weasel out of it. But, I'll let you -

Here - we agree that since Warren has, in fact, put forward family lore and high cheekbones as her evidence for Native American status, and there is no evidence put forward whatsoever that a single family member of hers was Native American - then, she's full of shit. Sounds like we've finally reached agreement on that. No need for your nonsense beyond that.

[L'Emmerdeur]

I still haven't seen any evidence that Warren "falsely claimed to be a native American in order to help her Ivy League career path."

[Forty Two]

I still haven't seen any evidence that Warren "falsely claimed to be a native American in order to help her Ivy League career path."

I don't know why she did it. I know she falsely claimed to be Native American, and she did so as part of her professorship at Harvard where she was billed as a native American professor. She hasn't set forth her motivation for doing so, and that's entirely subjective. So, unless there was some proof of her motive and purpose for lying in the offing, all we have is the lie. She did it, for whatever reason she may have had at the time. It could be, like a lot of celebrities do - Johnny Cash - Johnny Depp and some others - who are from former Confederate or southern states - claim a link to an Indian heritage to gain a kind of southern cred. It's not uncommon for people to baselessly claim to be 1/8 or 1/16 or 1/32 Cherokee when those folks are from Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, etc.

[Tero]

Relief for the Rich Act causes these Medicaid cuts