In July 2018, the editorial board of the New York Times abandoned all journalistic objectivity with an editorialcalling on the Democrat Party to go to war against President Trump, using mafia “Godfather” tactics.
But the plain truth is that, unless you are a “useless idiot” who swears by and only reads that piece of rag like an attorney I know, the New York Times (NYT) had abandoned objectivity long before July 2018. See:
We should, therefore, take a recent NYT editorial and its recommendation for what it is — yet another big dose of biased, leftist toxin.
On July 7, 2019, NYT published the editorial, “A New Approach on Housing Affordability,” penned by its editorial board, which “represents the opinions of the board, its editor and the publisher.”
The editorial begins by stating the problem, that of the high and rising cost of rental housing in the United States, and bemoans how millions cannot afford to live in the neighborhoods that they want.
The editorial then commends Democratic presidential candidates (Cory Booker, Julian Castro, Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren) who are addressing this problem with these policy proposals:
Increase federal subsidies for renters, at a cost of $93 billion (Kamala Harris) to $134 billion a year (Cory Booker) and more (Julian Castro).
Increase federal subsidies for the construction of affordable housing (Booker and Castro).
Increase housing construction by having the federal government put pressure on local governments to allow more “development” (Elizabeth Warren).
The NYT editorial opines that while increasing housing construction (“more market-rate development”) is a worthy goal, that isn’t enough — “Market-rate development, however, is not a sufficient solution.“
The problems are two:
“Wealthy residents” are the most resistant to “development”. In fact, “the states most resistant to allowing housing construction are the strongholds of the Democratic Party, in the Northeast and along the Pacific Coast, and the most resistant voters are the wealthy residents of those states who provide so much of the funding for Democratic presidential campaigns.”
Even if the federal government increases rent and housing subsidies, “poor children” would still not be “raised in economically diverse neighborhoods” with better schools, but instead would live “in neighborhoods with high levels of poverty.”
The New York Times’ proposal is to revive and expand a policy of the Obama administration, wherein “poor” renters were given large vouchers to move to areas with more expensive housing and better schools, by having the “irristible force” of the federal government require “affluent communities to accept affordable housing projects.”
In other words, if the NYT has its way, the federal government will compel local governments to construct Section 8 apartments and high-risers (“affordable housing”) in middle-class and “affluent” communities of single-family homes. Those “affordable” apartments and high-risers will be inhabited by the “poor” — among whom are gangbangers, illegal aliens and “refugees”.
This is socialism and the UN Agenda 21 on steroids.
Sam Dorman reports for Fox News that yesterday, July 11, 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a sweeping immigration plan that would dramatically increase the number of refugees admitted into the United States by nearly 800% from FY 2018 and 250% from even the Obama years.
In FY 2018, because of President Trump’s bans on refugees from a number of countries in the Middle East deemed security threats, the number of refugee admissions fell to record lows to about 22,000. Warren decried Trump’s restrictions, calling it an “abuse” of his authority. She said she would increase the number of refugee admissions to 125,000 in her first year as President, which would be an increase of 795% from FY 2018.
Warren’s plan also includes:
(1) Repealing a law requiring local police to enforce federal immigration laws, as well as an end to “unnecessary” detention. She said: “We already have the tools to effectively track and monitor individuals without shoving them into cages and camps along the border. As President, I’ll issue guidance ensuring that detention is only used where it is actually necessary because an individual poses a flight or safety risk. Let there be no ambiguity on this: if you are violating the basic rights of immigrants, now or in the future, a Warren administration will hold you accountable.”
(2) Expand legal immigration.
(3) Decriminalize illegal border crossings. Warren said that as President, she would “take executive action to provide a measure of protection for those who are undocumented. I’ll work with Congress to pass broad-reaching reform, but I’m also prepared to move forward with executive action if Congress refuses to act.”
(4) Alleviate the migrant crisis by giving $1.5 billion a year in foreign aid to Central and South America.
Frustrated by the performance of the 20-some odd Democrat candidates in their first round of debates, Satan has decided to throw his hat, err, horns into the ring and seek the 2020 Democrat nomination for President of the United States.
He’s granted his first interview to this publication, the Washington Possessed. The transcript appears below, and we’re sure that you’ll find it informative.
Question: Satan, the obvious first question is: what made you decide to run?
Satan: Well, as you know, normally I prefer to operate through stealth and deception; luring souls to do my bidding through temptation and, well, let’s just get it out there, capitalizing on their own stupidity and greed.
After all, if I were open about “yes, I really exist” and “yes, my intention is to have your soul condemned to the eternal fires of Hell,” my soul-yield to date would have been negligible.
But now, thanks to those knucklehead Democrats my hand is being forced; I must give-in to a long-held temptation that I’d resisted until now – that is, to “come out of the closet,” so to speak.
Question: Could you elaborate?
When Donald Trump was running against Hillary, my followers and I were absolutely convinced that we had it in the bag. Yes, there were prayer groups across the country praying for a miracle, for a Trump victory – but since I don’t believe in the power of prayer, I just knew that the efforts of those silly “Deplorables” would be for naught. Well, they really did get their miracle. So yes, I have to admit that even I didn’t see Trump’s victory coming – heaven really got one over on me with that one!
In hindsight, I guess our great victory in deceiving the American people to elect Barack Hussein Obama – twice! – led us into the temptation of becoming simultaneously cocky and complacent.
So for those of us on the dark side, recovering lost ground is critical; if Trump wins again in 2020 and secures the border and appoints more Constitutionally-loyal Supreme Court justices and cements an economy that works for the middle-class, our cause will be set back for decades, if not longer.
Question: I see. But why you, and not one of your many human followers who have already declared their candidacies to become the Democrat nominee for President?
Satan: [Sighs.] Well, as CEO – Chief Evil Officer – of this enterprise, I understand the value of delegating tasks. And while some of my followers openly worship me, most are unwitting dupes that have been led to believe that they’re actually “doing good,” even as they advance the forces of darkness. Their “social justice” is my “stopping Jesus.”
Though many of my followers have high IQ’s and have graduated from Ivy League colleges, they’re still idiots. While this makes accomplishing evil ends through delegation more complicated, they’re still very useful to me. Which, of course, explains the origin of the phrase “useful idiots.”
But when you employ useful idiots they’re going to sometimes, well, do somereally idiotic things. Unfortunately, that’s been the hallmark of this coven of 2020 Democrat candidates. Let me give you some examples:
Openly advocating for open borders and mass amnesty followed by mass “pathways to citizenship” is idiotic.
Openly advocating free health care for illegal aliens at a nationally televised Democrat debate is idiotic.
Openly advocating destroying jobs and America’s prosperity, and decimating standards of living through a “Green New Deal” is idiotic.
Openly advocating for stripping Americans of their Second Amendment rights is idiotic.
Openly advocating for abortion up to the moment of birth – and even after birth – is idiotic.
While I support all that and more, to be open about it is beyond idiotic, it’s crazy. Average Americans from coast-to-coast are now realizing that those Progressive candidates are not only nuts, but also that electing any one of those Democrat candidates will destroy America. The very opposite of “Make America Great Again.”
So the 2020 campaign is already on the trajectory that many Americans, perhaps even a plurality, are going to accurately conclude that Democrats are evil people pursuing an evil agenda. So itʼll become a referendum – a “binary choice” – between Donald Trump and America’s “Divinely Inspired” founding, and out-of-the-closet evil.
Given that, my side is now compelled to bring out our biggest gun: me and my extraordinary talent for deception and enticement through temptation.
Question: I see. But isn’t it risky for you to come out in the open as the candidate for the Democrat Party’s nomination?
Satan: Look, this country has been a thorn in my side since the beginning; ever since what you call “the Founding Fathers” wrote: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator …”
Every time I hear those words, and phrases like “one nation, under God,” I want gag, and then stick a pitchfork right through The Declaration of Independence. In fact, your country is second only to Israel on my Satanic sh** list.
Look, I’ve been on this a long time. After decades of Progressivism and Cultural Marxism and “separation of church and state” – and two terms of Barack Obama – we were finally on the cusp of irreversibly usurping this so-called “Divinely Inspired” country!
Trump’s election upended that. That’s caused my useful idiots to panic, and in their panic they’ve started to show America what’s really behind our curtain. So now there’s no turning back; sometimes you just have to throw the dice and hope you don’t come up snake eyes (though I do have a soft-spot for things snake-related, if you get my drift).
Question: But do you really believe that an openly evil candidate can get elected President in this country?
Satan: Sure. I’ve got a great shot at winning. The Democrat base will vote for me; they’ve been a solid Satanic voting bloc for some time.
Oh, by the way, I’m pondering rebranding the party and changing its name to “The Demonic Party.” Kind of catchy, don’t you think? In fact, I’ve already had a modified Democrat Party logo made up:
I really like it! And it’ll appeal to “Bernie” supporters. But I digress …
Speaking of voting blocs, have you listened to Alexandra Ocasio Cortez? My academics and media have succeeded in creating an entire generation of useful idiots; enthusiastic ones at that.
They’re so idiotic that they actually believe that they’re smart and enlightened and fighting for a historically inevitable victory over the retrograde forces of the “Deplorables.” I mean – while I’d never admit it to them – but really, how stupid can they be? Well, stupid enough to vote for me, en masse, and then feel self-righteous about it!
Plus, the news media, and Silicon Valley’s social media will be behind me, 100%. Already are; have been for years. [Interviewer nods approvingly.]
Also, we’ll offer the illegal aliens amnesty and citizenship in the here and now – and it won’t occur to them that we won’t be offering them amnesty from eternal damnation. So they’ll vote Democrat. Put America on a pathway to Hell? Sí se puede!
And for the ultimate blow, I’ll be promising “free stuff.” Lots and lots and lots of “free stuff!” Medical care, college tuition, food, housing, hair transplants, breast implants – you name it. Whatever it takes.
You can label that “fraud” or “social justice” or “Democratic Socialism” or whatever you want. Doesn’t matter. I’ve learned over the millennia that fostering “coveting thy neighbors’ goods” is one of the most effective ways of seducing souls. In fact, that’s why I ghost wrote “The Communist Manifesto” for Karl Marx.
So you can be sure that in some form or another, I will be the Democrat candidate for President of the United States of America. Even if I don’t get the Party’s nomination, my platform is the Democrat Party’s platform.
Question: I see. One final question: is your campaign going to have a theme song?
Satan: Why yes, as a matter of fact. As you know, Donald Trump has been using The Rolling Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” – which is a song I’ve always hated, because in a way its title alone tells the listener to reject greed and temptation.
For our campaign, we’re going to use The Rolling Stones’ “Sympathy for the Devil.” One of my all-time faves!
Question: Well, thank you for your time; and especially for the first time being so open concerning your ultimate plans and objectives.
Satan: You’re welcome. Oh, and I’ve noted that you’re with the mainstream media. So I’ll see you again – in Hell.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 2017, 19.7 million children, more than 1 in 4, live without a father in the home. As fathers.com puts it: “If it were classified as a disease, fatherlessness would be an epidemic worthy of attention as a national emergency.”
The sperm-donors, by their absence in their children’s lives, are responsible for a whole host of their children’s problems and social ills.
More than half (57.6%) of America’s black children lived absent their biological fathers.
31.2% of Hispanic children and 20.7% of white children lived in fatherless homes.
Just as #BlackLivesMatter are silent on the vast numbers of black babies being aborted and the black-on-black homicides in cities like Chicago and Detroit, they are silent on the epidemic of black men abandoning their children. Instead, #BlackLivesMatter blame whities for blacks’ social ills, and vocal spokesmen like Colin Kaepernick and Spike Lee make showy, grandstanding virtue-signaling.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
From SF Gate: California will become the first state to pay for some adults living in the country illegally to have full health benefits as the solidly liberal bastion continues to resist the policies of Republican President Donald Trump’s administration.
Democrats in the state Legislature reached an agreement Sunday afternoon as part of a broader plan to spend $213 billion of state and federal tax money over the next year. The legislature is expected to approve the deal this week. The agreement means low-income adults between the ages of 19 and 25 living in California illegally would be eligible for California’s Medicaid program, the joint state and federal health insurance program for the poor and disabled.
Only those in that age group whose incomes are low enough to qualify for the program would get the health benefits. State officials estimate that group will be about 90,000 people at a cost of $98 million per year. The state Senate had wanted to expand the proposal to include adults 65 and older, but the Newsom administration argued it would cost too much.
Sen. Holly Mitchell
“California believes that health is a fundamental right,” said state Sen. Holly Mitchell, a Los Angeles Democrat who led the budget negotiations.
The move is part of a larger effort to make sure everyone in California has health insurance. The proposal also makes California the first state in the country to help middle-income families pay their monthly health insurance premiums. It means a family of four earning as much as six times the federal poverty level — or more than $150,000 a year — would be eligible to get about $100 a month from the government to help pay their monthly health insurance premiums.
But to pay for part of it, the state will begin taxing people who don’t have health insurance. It’s a revival of the individual mandate penalty that had been law nationwide under former President Barack Obama’s health care law until Republicans in Congress eliminated it as part of the 2017 overhaul to the tax code.
Republicans on the legislative committee negotiating the budget voted against the proposal, arguing it was not fair to give health benefits to people who are in the country illegally while taxing people who are here legally for not purchasing health insurance.
The budget agreement still must be approved by the full state Legislature. State law requires lawmakers to enact a budget by midnight on June 15. If they don’t, lawmakers would lose their pay.
The health care proposals are a win for first-term Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who proposed both of them. Several lawmakers in the Democratic-dominated state legislature wanted to go further by offering health coverage to all adults living in California illegally. But Newsom opposed that, noting it would cost $3.4 billion.
Although he had never worked at a productive job in his life, Bernie Sanders, 77, the Demonrat senator of Vermont who fancies himself an “independent” but actually identifies as an outright socialist, is that curious oxymoronic creature — a millionaire socialist with three homes.
On February 19, 2019, Sanders joined the ever-growing list of Demonrat freaks and communists by declaring his candidacy for the 2020 presidential election, pledging to run a campaign focused on “transforming” the U.S. and “creating a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice” — blah, blah, blah. Shedding his political identity as an “Independent” as readily as a snake sheds its skin, Sanders will, once again, run as a Democrat, as he did in 2016.
3½ hours after announcing his candidacy, Sanders raised over $1 million from small donations. Within a week of his announcement, Sanders had raised $10 million from 359,914 donors, including some 12,000 registered Republicans.
Central to his campaign is a “Medicare for All” plan. What you may not know is that the plan is not just for all Americans or U.S. citizens, whether Medicare age (65 years) or not, Sanders means to extend Medicare to all residents in the United States, including the tens of millions who are here illegally. Even Obamacare doesn’t do that, but instead provides medical coverage to only U.S. citizens and “lawfully present” immigrants. Sanders’ Medicare for All, however, will not only prohibit the government from denying medical coverage because of “citizenship status”, it will cover even those who can’t meet the loose definition of resident — “Even if an individual is not covered under a broad definition of ‘residency’ by the secretary of HHS, the federal government can take steps ‘to ensure that every person in the United States has access to health care.'” (The Blaze)
Sanders’ insanely expansive and expensive Medicare for All will have to be funded — with what he calls tax hike “options”.
According to an estimate by Americans for Tax Reform, a nonprofit, 501(c)(4) taxpayer advocacy group founded in 1985 by Grover Norquist at the request of President Ronald Reagan, Sanders’ Medicare for All proposal will increase taxes by $16.2 trillion over ten years, which “would hit American families at every income level and businesses large and small.”
The dizzying list of proposed tax hikes will include:
A new 4% employee payroll tax: Sanders would impose another 4% payroll tax on top of existing payroll taxes. This new 4% payroll tax will be “income-based premium paid by employees,” which will increase taxes on American families and individuals by $3.9 trillion.
A new 7% employer payroll tax: Sanders would impose another 7% payroll tax on employees which he calls an “income-based premium paid by employers”, estimated to be a $3.5 trillion tax increase over ten years.
70% top tax bracket for ordinary income and capital gains income, which would make America the highest income tax rate in the world. According to the Tax Foundation, a top 70% rate for ordinary income and capital gains income above $10 million will raise $51.4 billion over a decade. After accounting for macroeconomic effects, the proposal would actually cost the government $63.5 billion because the proposal would suppress investment and economic growth.
77% death tax:Currently, the death tax applies to estates over $11 million and applies a 40% rate. Under Sanders’ proposal, the death tax would kick in at $3.5 million with a rate of 45%. He also proposes raising the death tax rate to 77% for inheritances. All of which will increase taxes by $2.2 trillion over ten years.
Wealth tax: Sanders proposes an annual wealth tax of 1 percent kicking in above $21 million in assets. Sanders estimates the proposal will increase taxes by $1.3 trillion over ten years.
Bank tax: Sanders proposes a tax on financial institutions totaling $800 billion over ten years.
Broaden the self employment tax: Sanders would require business owners to report more of their business income as salary, increasing the amount of self-employment tax owed, which would increase taxes by $247 billion over ten years.
U.S. national debt is already over $22 TRILLION. Imagine what Medicare for All taxes would do to our national debt. It would kill this country.
When you gonna start redistributing some of YOUR $1.5 MILLION net worth, Comrade? Because last time I looked, you and your commie wife gave only $350 to charity in 2017. Typical taxpayer, money-grabbing demorat…
As reported by NY Post: While exploring a run for president in Nevada, Mayor Bill de Blasio endorsed a committee to study reparations for descendants of slaves and then went further — saying that the country needs “a program of actual redistribution” of wealth.
A progressive activist asked the mayor his position on reparations at an event in Las Vegas Friday following the endorsement of the compensation plan by other presidential contenders like Elizabeth Warren.
“There’s no question that the issue of reparations has to be taken seriously,” said de Blasio, whose Vegas area barnstorming continues today, stating a clear, public position on the topic for the first time.
“I do believe the way to do it is to form a very public commission and say, ‘What is the way to address this problem once and for all?’”
But, he added, there needs to be a “bigger discussion about income inequality and oppression of other groups including Latinos, Native Americans, Asian and women,” he said at the event organized by the immigrant advocacy group Make the Road.
“I think we’re going to need something bigger even in a way, broader even in a way, then some of the ideas that have been put out there,” he said to the approximately 35 attendees.
“I think a program of actual redistribution which includes much heavier taxes on the wealthy,” he said. “The ultimate resolution has to be profoundly economic,” de Blasio said.
The redistribution comment went further than the message de Blasio has been honing since his state of the city speech in January—that “there’s plenty of money in this city, it’s just in the wrong hands.” During his out-of-city jaunts to early primary states de Blasio has swapped the word “city” for “world” and “country.”
His answer didn’t satisfy the activist who asked the question. “He did what a lot of candidates do, they, ‘All lives matter’ it. They try to broaden reparations for everyone,” Leslie Turner, 37, told The Post after the event.
“It’s actually ok to say, ‘This is actually for black people. We shouldn’t shy away from talking about what reparations specifically for black people could look like,” Turner said.
Other Democratic presidential candidates including Beto O’Rourke and Cory Booker support studying the matter.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Panera Bread Company exemplifies one of the stubborn attributes of the Left: They persist in advocating socialism/communism, in spite of the testimony from history that it doesn’t work.
Not only has socialism-communism wrecked entire economies, a contemporary example of which is Venzuela, there are the horrific human costs. Bearing silent witness are the bones of HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of those whom communist regimes had slaughtered in the 20th century.
But the Left insist that “they” didn’t do socialism/communism properly, and that “this time” they’ll make it work. As my erstwhile faux-socialist friend Stephanie so aptly put it many years ago: “I’ve made up my mind! Don’t confuse me with facts!”
“I’ve made up my mind. Don’t confuse me with facts!”
In November 2010 in a pious TED talk, Panera founder and then-CEO Ron Shaich announced the inception of Panera Cares — a chain of six nonprofit “community cafés” in Dearborn, Portland, Chicago, Boston, and St. Louis, which operate on a “pay-what-you-can” model “to help raise awareness about the very serious and pervasive problem of food insecurity (hunger) in the U.S.”.
Customers pay whatever amount they “can” for food, while others are encouraged to contribute their free labor and pay more (“donate”) in accordance with “suggested donation amounts” listed for all menu items “designed to help you understand the cost of ‘paying it forward’ and assisting those who struggle with food insecurity.”
In other words, the model of the Panera Cares community cafés is not even socialism. It’s communism — Karl Marx’s “To each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities”.In truth, the community cafés should more accurately be called “communist cafés”.
Overseeing the community cafés is the Panera Bread Foundation, an IRS-designated 501(c)(3) “private charity” launched in 2010 before Shaich’s TED talk, with the goal of helping the poor, providing education to at-risk youth, and promoting health and welfare.
Alas, human nature being what it is, although some people paid their “fair share” (whatever that means), many others simply took advantage of the communist “pay-what-you-can” model by paying little or nothing. The cafés reportedly were “mobbed” by students and homeless people looking for a free meal.
In February 15, 2019, Panera Cares closed its last communist café, in Boston. In an emailed statement, Panera Bread says: “Despite our commitment to this mission, it’s become clear that continued operation of the Boston Panera Cares is no longer viable.”
Now, the IRS is coming after the tax-exempt Panera Bread Foundation because, simply put, the “community cafés” didn’t do what they said they would do, i.e., feed people who couldn’t pay. A year after opening, because it was losing money, the supposed non-profit charitable “community café” in Portland began turning away those who couldn’t pay, banning students from visiting during school hours. The café even employed a “community outreach manager” to “gently usher out unwelcome diners” because, as Shaich told the Portland Tribune, “this is a cafe of shared responsibility and not a handout. It can’t serve as a shelter and we can’t have community organizations sending everybody down.”
Natasha Frost reports for Quartz, March 27, 2019, that according to a March 20 report on Law360 (which is viewable only if you register with a “professional” email address), the IRS has taken a closer look at this so-called nonprofit and says Panera owes a hefty tax bill going back to 2012 on annual revenues exceeding $7.5 million:
So far as the IRS is concerned, the cafés were primarily profit-making enterprises, rather than anything “inherently charitable.” (The fact that they closed because they weren’t making any money supports such a claim.)
Panera, in its defense, say it operated the cafés to literally feed the poor—what could be more charitable than that? In a slightly weaker line of argument, the company argues that it was providing “a valuable educational experience” by giving people of means the opportunity to “stand in line” with “individuals lacking means to purchase food.” These wealthier folk would “otherwise … rarely interact with someone who was hungry.”
To be deemed “publicly supported” by the IRS, organizations must take at least a third of their financial support from donations: Panera Cares Cafés’ public support made up close to 58%, the company said. It is not clear whether these were actually donations, in-kind donations of labor, or people simply paying above the sticker price on their lunch.
A 2018 article published in the Journal of Business Ethics seems to come down quite firmly on the side of the IRS. Academics Giana M. Eckhardt and Susan Dobscha [of the University of London and Bentley University] argue that Shaich was attempting to monetize people’s desire to “demonstrate their ‘goodness’ at the cash register,” by “paying more than the displayed price for their meal” and thus generate profit for the business. Though some people may indeed have wanted to signal their virtue, others were uncomfortable with a pricing system that put the onus on them —a rude awakening to a gift economy system that does expect people to behave selflessly.
In a further blow to Panera’s charitable aspirations, the experience of dining alongside the “food insecure” did not, as Panera’s filings suggested, facilitate interclass communication and mingling. Instead, Eckhardt and Dobscha found, wealthy people felt disdainful of their fellow diners; the homeless or poor, “rather than being empowered via a dignified dining experience,” felt ashamed or uncomfortable.
When one wants to implement a system, they usually do research on similar efforts that have been successful. Pssst, demorats: You won’t find one with UBI.
From NY Post: Newark could become the first major American city to roll out a guaranteed income in a bid to slash the city’s sky-high poverty rates.
The city’s mayor, Ras Baraka, is setting up a task force to study if such a program would be possible as one way to tackle the city’s entrenched poverty.
Baraka provided no other details in his State of the City address, which was delivered last week.
“The problems we have belong to all of us, not just a few of us, so the solutions must be collective and not individual,” Baraka said. “We believe in universal basic income, especially in a time where studies have shown that families that have a crisis of just $400 in a month may experience a setback that may be difficult, even impossible, to recover from.”
More than a quarter of Newark residents — 27.8 percent — live below the poverty line, figures from the Census Bureau show. The typical Newark household makes just $35,000 a year, roughly half of the $75,000 average for the entire New York City metro area.
Basic income programs typically provide assistance to individuals regardless of employment status — pitched by some economists as a 21st-century update to classic welfare programs that have been dramatically reduced in recent decades.
High-profile liberals, like freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have embraced the notion as a way to help working-class Americans amid the economic disruptions caused by the growing automation of the economy.
Conservatives quickly derided the idea as a potential big-government boondoggle, pointing out that a Scandinavian country, Finland, quickly abandoned its basic income experiment.
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
It’s bad enough that U.S. taxpayers are forced to pay for abortion via the federal government’s funding of Planned Parenthood, a new bill introduced by Demonrats will force taxpayers to fund any and all abortions in America.
Under the guise of a benevolent concern to provide government health care for all Americans, the Medicare For All Act of 2019 isn’t just socialism. The bill funds the killing of unborn Americans — all at taxpayers’ expense.
Currently, federal law prohibits Medicare money from paying for abortion services via the Hyde Amendment, but some states have programs that fund abortions by “low-income” women. Some private insurance policies also cover, or partially cover, abortion services. The Medicare for All Act of 2019 would fund abortion by repealing the Hyde Amendment.
On February 28, 2019, Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Debbie Dingell (D-MI) introduced the Medicare for All Act of 2019. The bill is co-sponsored by more than 100 House Democrats.
It’s free!: “Enrollment in Medicare for All would not require any private insurance premiums or deductibles. Upon receiving care, patients would not be charged any co-pays or other out-of-pocket costs.”
It covers everything!: “Provides comprehensive health care coverage including all primary care, hospital and outpatient services, dental, vision, audiology, women’s reproductive health services, maternity and newborn care, long-term services and supports, prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse treatment, laboratory and diagnostic services, ambulatory services, and more.”
You can choose your doctor!: “Patients will have complete freedom to choose the doctors, hospitals, and other providers they wish to see, without worrying about whether a provider is ‘in-network’.”
It’ll save money!: “Simplify the healthcare system by moving to a single-payer model,” thereby reducing “the hundreds of billions of dollars wasted on the administration of the current inefficient multi-payer system, allowing providers to focus on patientcare instead.”
Lower-price meds!: “Substantially lower the costs of prescription drugs” by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, “as other countries do.”
We’ll stick it to those greedy bastards!: “Prevent healthcare corporations from overcharging for the costs of their services and profiting off illness and injury. The legislation prevents providers from using payments from the program for profit, union-busting,marketing, or federal campaign contributions.”
Reporting for Catholic News Agency, Christine Rousselle warns that the Medicare for All Act “also aims to introduce universal ‘comprehensive reproductive health’ coverage for women, including abortions. It is unclear what the scope of abortion provisions would be, or if doctors would be able to refuse to participate in abortions if they are morally opposed to the procedure.”
President and CEO Ilyse Hogue of the pro-abort NARAL Pro-Choice America enthused in a statement: “Representative Jayapal has been an unwavering champion for women and reproductive freedom [abortion] and we applaud her leadership today. Rep. Jayapal’s Medicare for All proposal recognizes the simple truth that women will never be equal members in society until we have full access to reproductive healthcare. Put simply, a right is not a right if you cannot access it.”
Tom Shakely, the chief engagement officer at Americans United For Life, points out that the Medicare for All Act would:
Fund abortions by repealing the Hyde amendment.
Ban private insurance, which can have serious consequences for healthcare choice and accountability.
Create a single and unaccountable government monopoly on healthcare. Shakely warns: “We would never want the U.S. Postal Service to be granted a monopoly over the delivery of all goods in America. Take that principle and apply it to healthcare, if you’re not certain of how you feel about Medicare for All.”