At this hour:
Pound down 10%
FTSE futures down 10%
DOW futures down 5%
Japan halts trading.
US stock futures plunge
The Brits have decided, and unfortunately it looks like they may have set things in progress to lose many of their jobs, and increase prices for things they need. It may prove to be a good example for those who expect Trump to do the same things here. (break trade agreements, increase tariffs, and build walls to separate us from our customers and suppliers.)
the haves and have nots:
So you are saying that all the money is in the hands of the top 10%, and the middle class and the lower classes have little or nothing? What should we do about that?
In addition, if Hillary wins in AZ, that means that McCain may have a hard time holding his senate seat, as well. But it's going take at least a couple more months before many people even know that there will be an election in the near future. We'll see what happens in November.
Yes, and those collection agencies take those bills at 10 cents on the dollar, because they know they can't collect most of them. You just can't squeeze water out of a rock. That's why most people have insurance, because they know they won't be able to pay a big medical bill it they were "lucky" enough to get one.
Yes, they are billed. But that doesn't mean that they can or will pay. In many states,especially those states that haven't accepted Medicaid, they just don't pay.
It's not just taxpayers who are paying for them. Who pays actually varies form state to state. Hospitals set their prices based on their costs. One of their costs is the care for the poor who have no insurance and can't pay their own way. If state taxpayers don't cover them (or Medicaid), then the price for those who are insured goes up to cover the rest. Before the ACA health care was the biggest reason for personal bankruptcy. . It still is in many of the states that haven't accepted Medicaid to insure and cover the poor.
Yes it looks a lot like the ACA, but there seem t be two major differences.
1. People would not be required to have insurance, many millions would be allowed to use the ER for their health care, where they would not be able to pay, in many cases, and so pushing their health care costs onto the backs of those who are insured, and tax payers. (And this exactly what is happening in states like Texas now, where insurance costs are jumping quickly, because the insured there are still paying for he uninsured.)
2. The primary way the help those buying health insurance is with a tax credit. But that only works for those who pay taxes, and not for the "47%" who pay no taxes, and who are primarily the ones without insurance.
"they were elected for the same reasons then as now. To stop liberal idiots"
So, again, Springer confirms that the defense, the health and welfare of our nation is just not in today's' conservatives view. You make it clear that that's not what you or today's conservatives care about.
So, if today's conservatives care nothing about our nation, as you have demonstrated, why should we trust any of them to run our country??
Well, then it appears that the Republicans were elected to do completely different things in Clinton's era, and now.
In the 1990's Gingrich, and Clinton talked and put the country first. As a result, they did the business of the nation, and worked together to defend and improve our country. Laws enacted, by Congress, then.
103rd 1993-94 473
104th 1995-96 337
105th 1997-98 404
106th 1999-00 604
But recent Congresses seem to be completely opposed to doing the county's business. They won't even talk about what needs to be done, but simply ignore everything that is happening around them. There's a good reason that they've been called "do-noting" Congresses.
112th 2011-12 284
113th 2013-14 296
114th 2015-16 177 (Still in session, so there may be a few more)
What was Congress elected to do in the 1990's that today's Congress was clearly not elected to do?
Geez, given all that Clinton accomplished in 8 years, it makes you wonder what his successor's work habits were??
Clinton accomplishments include, highest home ownership rate in US history, lowest unemployment in 30 years, improved and increased education at all levels., Family and Medical leave act, smallest welfare roles in 32 years, lowest poverty rate in 20 years, deactivated 1,700 old Soviet nukes, paid off $360 billion in national debt, created 250,000 new jobs every month, on average, Signed the Brady Bill, GATT tax cut, with NATO and UN, brokered a Bosnian peace agreement, removed vulnerable enriched uranium from crumbling Soviet nations, contributed to Northern Ireland ceasefire, Lobbying Disclosure Act, and dozens more that I don't have time to type in.
She's only losing with millennials because most of them have been supporting Bernie. That will change after the convention. There are still 4 or 5 month for folks to change their minds. We'll see what happens in November.
Hillary seems to be losing among white men. That's 31% of US citizens. Among everyone else, she appears to be leading right now. But there are 4 or 5 months before anyone votes. We'll see what happens then.
How can you get so many things wrong, all at one time??
I don't want unrestricted immigration, or any unvetted immigration. Guns are not the problem, but putting them in the hands of terrorists, criminals, the mentally ill, and children is very wrong. Neither guns, nor car need be banned.
How do you pan to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, criminals, the mentally ill, and children? Until that happens, 10's of thousands of Americans will continue to be shot, and killed every year.
And he appears to have had some mental illness as well.
So, then, why have the NRA, and so many of today's conservatives, including a majority of senators, protected his right to buy those guns so strongly? They certainly look like they are the strongest supporters of the "home grown liberal radical extremist, Islamic terrorists" in the nation. Either we support their right to buy big guns, and explosives, or not. Today's conservatives have clearly shown which side of that coin they stand on, and its not the side that might stop these shootings.
The national voter registration act of 1993 (motor voter act) doesn't change the requirement for voter registration. It simple requires that states provide the means to register to vote when people get or renew a driver's license, or at disability offices and public assistance offices. The requirements are the same: age, citizenship, and domicile.
I've spend about a month of this year in Utah. (and more than that last year). I've got a number of Utah friends and relatives, but what I reported here was based on existing polls, and maybe some Utah newspaper reports, not what they've told me, although they do support the poll results.
The issue is not that Utah's conservative Mormons will vote for Clinton. They won't. but the issue is that they will also not vote for Trump. Utah pools now show about 1/3 voting for Clinton, 1/3 voting for Trump, and 1/3 voting for someone else, or not voting at all. A good ground game in Utah could turn polls like that into a Hillary victory. But 5 months is a long time. Lots of opinions could still change.
Here's their recent results:
Rasmussen (6/19) - Clinton 44%, Trump 39% - likely voters.
Zogby (6/2) - Clinton 40%, Trump 34% - likely voters.
API - Could not find any of their results, but I did see that they may be associated with Huffington Post.
Some polls a month ago did show that Trump has some lead over Clinton, but that doesn't seem to be the case now. And there is still at least 4 months to go before many even begin to think about the election.
Perhaps. What are those polls?
In 2012 polls at this point in the year said that Obama has, at best a fraction of a point lead, and in reality it was a tie.
On election day, 7 polls said that it was still a tie, or Romney would win. 4 others said that Obama had a slim lead.
When the votes were counted at the end of the day, Obama had won by 4%.
It looks like most pollsters are having the same problem this year. That is they still don't know how to count votes among minority groups - minorities who are becoming or already are the majority in many states.