Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » Today, 7:51 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 7:51 am

Watch.

The graph represents US health expenditures on a per capita basis.

Take an object with a straight edge and set it along the line of the graph starting at the intersection of the x and y axes.

Notice how, around 2010, the line starts falling away from your straight line gauge?

So what??

Did anything REDUCE total EXPENDITURES or did they continue to RISE?? 

They CONTINUED TO RISE, but perhaps at a LOWER RATE. That doesn't do what your KNEEGROW GOD said it would do, ****!!

KICKING YOUR *** IS CHILD'S PLAY!! 

Chase me more. 

Beekeeper » Today, 9:11 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:11 am

So what??

Did anything REDUCE total EXPENDITURES or did they continue to RISE?? 


 

Stop...

My way.


Answer the question 

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:17 am

Beekeeper » Today, 9:11 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:11 am

So what??

Did anything REDUCE total EXPENDITURES or did they continue to RISE?? 



 

Stop...

My way.


Answer the question 

 

I hope @Beekeeper  tells you to **** off with your controlly **** because you have no **** integrity whatsoever.

Who the **** do you think you are with this "my way" ****??
 

Huey » Today, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:24 am

I hope @Beekeeper  tells you to 

Of course you do..

For his sake...


I'll persist in my struggle against Willful Ignorance. 

 

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:26 am

Huey » Today, 9:24 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:24 am

I hope @Beekeeper  tells you to 

Of course you do..

For his sake...


I'll persist in my struggle against Willful Ignorance. 

 

 

If that is your struggle start by looking in the mirror and start there. 

Huey » Today, 9:32 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:32 am

If that is your struggle start by looking in the mirror 

Princess Bickle, please...

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 12:29 pm » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 12:29 pm

That's even better...so the answer is either for everyone to take a pay cut, or for the FOX nursing unwashed to recognize how good they have it...

Grifty took 2 grand out of your pocket with tariffs..

You people are such **** rubes..

I had no idea Trump was doing my shopping and buying only items with tariffs on them. The effects of tariffs on our household has been fractional. Two grand? I sincerely doubt that!

I would imagine that households that are doing well are aware of their situation compared to the median. For some reason I always thought retaining that wealth was part of the game. For the others, Pay.gov will take your donations, you will feel better!      

This will probably make you **** a bloody cinder block:

General Wealth Profile: Media audience research indicates that Fox News viewers tend to have a higher median net worth (frequently estimated around $750,000 or more) compared to audiences of networks like CNN or MSNBC, which hover closer to a median net worth of $350,000

That's some seriously funny **** right there!






 

Fuelman » Today, 9:42 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:42 am

I had no idea Trump was doing my shopping and buying only items with tariffs on them. The effects of tariffs on our household has been fractional. Two grand? I sincerely doubt that!

I would imagine that households that are doing well are aware of their situation compared to the median. For some reason I always thought retaining that wealth was part of the game. For the others, Pay.gov will take your donations, you will feel better!      

This will probably make you **** a bloody cinder block:

General Wealth Profile: Media audience research indicates that Fox News viewers tend to have a higher median net worth (frequently estimated around $750,000 or more) compared to audiences of networks like CNN or MSNBC, which hover closer to a median net worth of $350,000

That's some seriously funny **** right there!

Why, you simple-minded twat...


The FOX audience skews heavily older...
 

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:45 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:45 am

Fuelman » Today, 9:42 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:42 am

I had no idea Trump was doing my shopping and buying only items with tariffs on them. The effects of tariffs on our household has been fractional. Two grand? I sincerely doubt that!

I would imagine that households that are doing well are aware of their situation compared to the median. For some reason I always thought retaining that wealth was part of the game. For the others, Pay.gov will take your donations, you will feel better!      

This will probably make you **** a bloody cinder block:

General Wealth Profile: Media audience research indicates that Fox News viewers tend to have a higher median net worth (frequently estimated around $750,000 or more) compared to audiences of networks like CNN or MSNBC, which hover closer to a median net worth of $350,000

That's some seriously funny **** right there!

Why, you simple-minded twat...


The FOX audience skews heavily older...
 

 

Damn, your meltdown is growing, Mary.
 

Huey » Today, 9:47 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:47 am

Damn, your meltdown is growing, Mary.

What "meltdown"?


 

Blackvegetable » Today, 9:49 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:49 am

Huey » Today, 9:47 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:47 am

Damn, your meltdown is growing, Mary.

What "meltdown"?


 

 

The more you use TWAT the madder YOU are.

RebelGator » Yesterday, 8:45 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 8:45 am

Are you flying to Denmark, too?

BV needs his binky.

 

Huey » Yesterday, 9:50 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:50 am

The more you use TWAT the madder YOU are.

But not when you borrow it, right, Fredo?

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:26 am

Of course you do..

For his sake...

I'll persist in my struggle against Willful Ignorance.

why struggle when you can just accept your willful ignorance?

Fuelman » Yesterday, 9:42 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:42 am

I had no idea Trump was doing my shopping and buying only items with tariffs on them. The effects of tariffs on our household has been fractional. Two grand? I sincerely doubt that!

I would imagine that households that are doing well are aware of their situation compared to the median. For some reason I always thought retaining that wealth was part of the game. For the others, Pay.gov will take your donations, you will feel better!      

This will probably make you **** a bloody cinder block:

General Wealth Profile: Media audience research indicates that Fox News viewers tend to have a higher median net worth (frequently estimated around $750,000 or more) compared to audiences of networks like CNN or MSNBC, which hover closer to a median net worth of $350,000

That's some seriously funny **** right there!

 
 

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:49 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:49 am

What "meltdown"?

your perpetual state of…
 

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 9:17 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 9:17 am

Stop...

My way.

Answer the question

I have. MULTIPLE TIMES!!

Because the ANSWER kicks your *** doesn't mean you can keep trying to get an answer that suits your **** ideology.

FACTS are persistent little things that YOU HATE and will RUN FROM MASSIVELY!!

Chase me some more, ****!!

Did your KNEEGROW GOD's ovomitcare REDUCE COSTS OF HEALTHCARE AND REDUCE GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES?? When you answer that one, we can talk. UNTIL THEN, **** OFF!!

Run ****, RUN!!           

Beekeeper » Yesterday, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:22 am

I have. MULTIPLE TIMES!!

Because the ANSWER kicks your *** doesn't mean you can keep trying to get an answer that suits your **** ideology.

FACTS are persistent little things that YOU HATE and will RUN FROM MASSIVELY!!

Chase me some more, ****!!

Did your KNEEGROW GOD's ovomitcare REDUCE COSTS OF HEALTHCARE AND REDUCE GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES?? When you answer that one, we can talk. UNTIL THEN, **** OFF!!

Run ****, RUN!!         

Huey avatar Huey +5 9 minutes ago


Now pay attention.


NO ONE, who isn't a crackhead, expected ACA to reduce the COST of Healthcare...the aim was to reduce the RATE OF GROWTH in AGGREGATE expenditures.

Do either of you idiots follow so far?

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:44 am

Huey avatar Huey +5 9 minutes ago

Now pay attention.

NO ONE, who isn't a crackhead, expected ACA to reduce the COST of Healthcare...the aim was to reduce the RATE OF GROWTH in AGGREGATE expenditures.

Do either of you idiots follow so far?

There yuo go again making up **** to suit your LIES!!

FACTS are a stubborn thing, ****!!

President Barack Obama repeatedly claimed during his 2008 campaign and throughout the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that the law would lower health care costs, famously promising on the campaign trail that it would reduce typical family health insurance premiums by $2,500 per year

Now what DID end up happening is PREMIUMS WENT UP, DEDUCTIBLES AND OUT OF POCKET COSTS TRIPLED AND IN SOME CASES QUADRUPLED, and no one saved a DAMN PENNY on the cost of healthcare. HOSPITAL AND DOCTOR COSTS HAVE INCREASED dramatically!!

Now for MORE FACTS, ****!!

Key Cost Increases Since the ACA Took Effect

• Individual Market Premiums: Average benchmark and open-market premiums have more than doubled (increasing roughly 114% to 143% depending on baseline years like 2013/2014 through recent cycles). 
• Deductibles: Out-of-pocket deductibles for ACA-compliant and individual market plans have grown significantly—rising by over 35% to 37% (translating to thousands of dollars more for individuals and families). 
• Employer-Sponsored Insurance (ESI): Traditional employer-backed health plans have also climbed, though at a slower rate than individual-market exchange plans. 
• National Health Expenditures: Total U.S. health care spending has scaled dramatically, growing from under $3 trillion prior to full ACA implementation to nearly $5 trillion annually according to CMS data via KFF. 

So where did that Cost Curve get bent DOWNWARD??

FACTS tell us that IT WENT THE OPPOSITE WAY, *******!!

 
 

Blackvegetable » Yesterday, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:44 am

Beekeeper » Yesterday, 10:22 am » wrote: ↑

Yesterday, 10:22 am

I have. MULTIPLE TIMES!!

Because the ANSWER kicks your *** doesn't mean you can keep trying to get an answer that suits your **** ideology.

FACTS are persistent little things that YOU HATE and will RUN FROM MASSIVELY!!

Chase me some more, ****!!

Did your KNEEGROW GOD's ovomitcare REDUCE COSTS OF HEALTHCARE AND REDUCE GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES?? When you answer that one, we can talk. UNTIL THEN, **** OFF!!

Run ****, RUN!!         

Huey avatar Huey +5 9 minutes ago

Now pay attention.

NO ONE, who isn't a crackhead, expected ACA to reduce the COST of Healthcare...the aim was to reduce the RATE OF GROWTH in AGGREGATE expenditures.

Do either of you idiots follow so far?

Now you sit back and pay attention:

Cut the cost of a typical family’s health insurance premium by up to $2,500 a year\Barack Obama"I will sign a universal health care bill into law by the end of my first term as president that will cover every American and cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year."

That is listed as a promise.  Obama lied and now you are lying yourself.

Notice I can quote a post without deleting all of your emotional ****.