2020 Senate & House

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Joe Fan, May 5, 2019.

  1. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    ^If there is a way to get rid of LA, San Francisco, and Sacramento, while leaving the rest of the state intact, that would work.
     
  2. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    Horn6721, I think any kind of war would be worth preventing it.
     
  3. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    Mona
    I am guess I am asking, a war between citizens here?
     
  4. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

  5. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    Interesting
    But where do the police fit in?
    I wonder if there are enough libs with guns to put up a decent fight? :smile1:
     
  6. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    I don't know. Either they are for or against Californication of the US.
     
  7. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 1,000+ Posts

  8. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Joe Manchin is considering leaving the Senate before end of his term
    There is a push for him to run for governor (again)
     
  9. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 1,000+ Posts

  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Jon Stewart is a throbbing tool. However, he's right about this. Franky, I'm surprised we haven't basically guaranteed their care. We're just not talking about that many people, and they performed exceptionally when the country needed them most. And has anyone really dismissed it as a New York problem? It was an act of international terrorism, not grease fire that got out of control. They didn't shirk their responsibility on 9/11. We shouldn't shirk ours.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    Didn't NYPD and FDNY already have health insurance? I am not following what is going on here.
     
  12. LongestHorn

    LongestHorn 1,000+ Posts

  13. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

    Funding it through 2090? The heroes will all be dead of natural causes long before then. I'm not against the bill, but I sure do question why it should be funded for that length of time.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It provides more than health benefits.

    That seems like a long time, but I wouldn't kill the bill over that. If everybody's dead by then, then there won't be anyone to file a claim.
     
  15. 4th_floor

    4th_floor 1,000+ Posts

    No but there will still be a bureaucracy with government employees to pay to administer the program. And who's to say it won't be renewed in 2090. Kinda of like the telephone tax that was levied to pay for the Spanish American war, and continued to be collected until 2006.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    That's not a smart reason not to extend the program. This isn't a big program. It's quite small. The federal employees it hires (which likely isn't many) may not get fired (since virtually no federal employees get fired), but as claims dry up, they would likely get reassigned (happens all the time) or not replaced when they die or retire.

    Will it get extended again in 2090? I doubt it. However, I'm not willing to screw 9/11 first responders (who never would have been called if the federal government had been doing its job because 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened) on the off chance that the Congress might be dumb enough to renew the program 30 or 40 years after most of us are dead.

    Let's deal with the programs that are really killing us financially - Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and waste in the Pentagon. After we clean all those up, then we can worry about any minor issues and problems with one of the very few federal programs that is actually doing something good.
     
  17. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Apparently a Dem was caught lying, again

     
    • poop poop x 1
  18. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    How many billions are designated for that program, and how many people are beneficiaries? How many, statistically speaking, would have cancer anyway? Do we set up a similar fund for the veterans and families of those killed in Afghanistan that went to war? Lots of questions to answer about this emotion laden bill, and I support the firefighters. I just don't so in a stupid manner.

    I remember the first thing Hillary and Schumer did after 9-11 was to go ask Pres. Bush for billions of dollars for New York without having any idea of the cost, or what insurance was already in place to pay the losses. Yes, stupid government giveaways are hurting the economy.
     
  19. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    $10.2 billion over ten years - less money than it costs when Nancy Pelosi farts.

    My understanding is that there are about 17,000 claims pending. It's not just cancer victims.

    Yes, and they're pretty generous. They aren't special funds. They're permanent federal programs that pay out benefits to those injured or killed in the line of duty and their families. It's serious coin. In fact, we pay out massive amounts of money for veterans who haven't been harmed

    Yes, that was a crock. This is different though. This isn't "billions for New York." This is money for the actual people (and their families) who were harmed or killed performing a duty they never should have to have performed. Yes, they were doing their jobs, but this particular call only came in because the federal government did a horrifically bad job in keeping some people terrible people out of the country. They died because of gross federal neglect.

    Would I like to see the program funded with spending cuts to other areas? Absolutely, but is it a hill I'm willing to die on when we're talking about a relatively minuscule program that takes care of some of the most worthy recipients of federal money? No.
     
  20. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 1,000+ Posts

    I did the math wrong the first time around. That works out to about $600,000 per claimant, which is not too bad.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019
  21. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    These people never fail to amuse

     
  22. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    On Tuesday, Rs swept the special election races in North Carolina.
    Republican Greg Murphy won North Carolina’s 3rd Congressional District by over 20 points. And Rep Dan Bishop came from 15 points down to win North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District by 2 points.

    Perhaps more remarkable is how big the wins were. In Dist 9, Bishop won Robeson County in the eastern part of the district. That county went to the Democrat by 15 points just last year. On Tuesday Bishop nearly flipped the county. Dem McCready only won the county by 1 point

    [​IMG]
     
  23. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    A federal jury convicted Dem power broker Jerry Lundergan, father of the the KY Secretary of State who ran for the Senate in 2014, guilty on multiple felony charges for illegally funneling money to her failed Senate run. Lundergan was Chairman of the Kentucky Democrat Party

    Go figure

    https://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article235005227.html
     
  24. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    "stupid" and giveaways" - kinda synonymous.
     
  25. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  26. Horn6721

    Horn6721 Half of seeming clever is keeping your mouth shut.

    So the black Dem is angry because the white Dem senator wants more Hispanics Asians gays even disabled to join the Dem Party?
    And the black Dem is calling the Dem Senator racist ?
    My oh my:rolleyes1:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  27. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    That may be the excuse, but I think there are some who are also mad that Jones hasn't been quite as liberal as they hoped he'd be. He votes with Trump about 40 percent of the time and has been less of a partisan hack than expected. In other words, he actually wants a chance at getting reelected.
     
  28. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  29. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    That is kind of common sense though, right?
     
  30. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    There is evidence of plenty of bias in facial recognition technology. I evaluated some for a company initiative and the failure rate for ethnic minorities in the US was astronomical. It was very good at identifying Caucasians but it was off the charts bad for Asians.

    I suspect but can't prove the facial recognition software the Chinese Government is using is very good about identifying people of Asian descent but does it struggle with Caucasian and African descent people?
     

Share This Page