Buying Greeenland

Bill Clinton wasn't giving seminars, he was merely giving speeches. And sure, he's entitled to do that, but not from countries, organizations, businesses that need influence with the US govt while his WIFE IS SECRETARY OF STATE. That money is going into her pockets too.

What do you think would happen if you were on the local planning board and your wife took $5K for a speech to the developer that needs a variance for a new shopping mall? And the same developer made a $100K donation to your family's "foundation"? That what the Clintons were doing, only to the tune of tens of tens of millions into their own pockets and billions into the foundation. The crowning example was the Uranium One deal, where Bill got paid $500K by the RUSSIAN bank handling the deal, the "foundation" got $135 mil from foreigners connected to the deal. Some foreigners suddenly feel philanthropic to the tune of $135 mil and the Clinton foundation in America is the only charity they can think of?

This is something that all Americans should be outraged over and they should be demanding new laws to make sure this is clearly ILLEGAL and can't happen again. You want to tell us again that you're a Republican?

RoFL

Even an honest Democrat would admit that stinks to high heaven and is very, very wrong. Make your choice. Hubby can give speeches to foreign countries, you can solicit around the world for your "foundation" or you can be Sec of State. You can't do both. And the proof of what was going on is in the fact that Bill's charge per speech and his overall revenue suddenly went up when Hillary became Sec of State. So too did the income at the foundation. Both went way back down again as soon as she was no longer Sec of State.

Show us an example where a previous Sec of State had a spouse raking in $500K for speeches from foreign countries, organizations, individuals that needed influence with the govt. Show us one that had a "foundation" that raked in anything, much less billions. You can't, it never happened.

I suppose you think Bill pardoning Marc Rich on his last day in office, who was still on the FBIs most wanted list, the biggest tax cheat in US history, who had fled the US, had nothing to do with Rich's ex-wife donating $400K to Bill's library and over a million to the Democrat party?

Want to tell us again how you're a Republican?

An empty distinction.

,

Where is the legislation that says he was not entitled to give speeches to anybody who would pay for them?

Past presidents have always been free to give speeches (and free to get pai d for giving them) . The idea that he would have lost that right because hi s wife had become secretary of state is trifle bizarre. Trader4 has a lot o f silly ideas but this one is sillier than most.

A secretary of state isn't sitting on any kind of planning board, and the p roposition that a past president of the US is going to take some kind of br ibe to influence her does show a remarkable lack of respect for the office of the president of the US.

It's also a trifle unrealistic. The Clinton's both trained as lawyers and would be very careful not to take any money that might look like a brib e to somebody who knew the laws involved. Trader4 doesn't known anything mu ch, which leaves him free to imagine all sort of rules that don't actually exist.

That's what Trader4 likes to think that the Clinton's were doing.

If he had any money, the Clintons would sue him for libel, and win bigtime.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

l they

I think they'd be more concerned about keeping their free healthcare, free dentist, free education, welfare etc.

ns,

o anybody who would pay for them?

We need to pass those laws so that this can never happen again. America's laws did not envision brazen, pocket stuffing pigs like the Clintons. I would hope that Americans of all parties would recognize this, but then your an Australian, so you're irrelevant.

aid for giving them) . The idea that he would have lost that right because his wife had become secretary of state is trifle bizarre. Trader4 has a lot of silly ideas but this one is sillier than most.

It's not at all silly, it's obviously a serious conflict of interest. Even Obama recognized that, he tried to reign them in. He was partially successful. When Bill wanted to give paid speeches in NK while Hillary was Sec of State, it was blocked. That's right, Bill Clinton had the unmitigated nerve to try to give paid speeches in NK while Hillary was Sec of STate! I'm sure you'll tell us all that is perfectly proper. He got away with a lot of similar pay-to-play.

Good grief you're stupid.

and the proposition that a past president of the US is going to take some kind of bribe to influence her does show a remarkable lack of respect for t he office of the president of the US.

No, what shows disrespect of the office of president and Sec of State is what the Clintons did with their pay-to-play shakedown.

ibe to somebody who knew the laws involved.

ROFL

They didn't give a rat's ass if it looked like a bribe. What went on with Uranium One looked exactly like a bribe. All the Clintons as lawyers cared about was whether anyone could PROVE it was a bribe. As long as they felt they could not, then they wallowed in the pig's trough, stuffing their wallets. Imagine if Melania was going around getting paid for speeches. Imagine if she wanted to give a speech paid for by Russia! There is no law that specifically bars that either and boy then you libs would be singing an entirely different tune, sad sack of hypocrites that you are. BTW, who did give a paid speech in RUSSIA? Why Bill Clinton of course, $500K. I'm sure that it was paid for by the investment bank that was doing the Uranium One deal, where RUSSIA bought 20% of the uranium capacity in the US, a sale that Hillary had to vote on as Sec of State, was just a pure coincidence.

ROFL

Trader4 doesn't known anything much, which leaves him free to imagine all sort of rules that don't actually exist.

In a parlimentary sysrem, aren't there times when there is "no government" ?

What happens if, heaven forbid, you need one?

We haven't had a bad PCB, open or short, in years. We do specify bare-board testing.

l they

I used to work for a very high tech company making attached array processor s. That's the category the Cray supercomputers were in. Some 10 or 15 yea rs later these machines were largely obsolete due to the single chip in a P C being proportionally so much faster per dollar. This company never chang ed their business model until one day, on the literal verge of bankruptcy, they swapped businesses with a company scanning documents and making docume nt scanning equipment. Yes, the literally jacked up the two names and swap ped the businesses underneath.

I'll bet Trump is thinking something similar with Greenland and Puerto Rico .

--

  Rick C. 

  +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

He gives pro bono speeches here.

--

  Rick C. 

  ++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  ++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

t

Canada is actually next door. Win-win for both sides if they joined us..

John :-#)#

ROTFLMAO Whitewater

Dan

: : :

until they

ain. Great

a?

might get

butt. What

d robbed

s

cheer him

ot-as-I

st

icans

ed

that

ght

up

d".

very

n you

o time?

r going

of those

d that

irty deeds

down.

brazenly.

picable.

ways

't

lly

es,

t.

as from

n't

have.

t in

gly

head,

ll.

hings

m

that,

That simply means there is no party or coalition with a majority so they ca n't pass any bills and they need to elect a new PM. That's pretty much wha t we have in the US every day except we are stuck with the same President n o matter what for four years... potentially even if he shoots someone in th e middle of Times Square.

--

  Rick C. 

  --- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  --- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

What makes you think it's free, Does Denmark pay for it? If that's true, them I'll be happy to have Bernie's free healthcare as long as we (the US) can find a country of 33,000,000,000 to foot the bill. Because that's the population ratio of Denmark to Greenland.

But if that's true the people of Denmark are getting a raw deal.

" Free healthcare in Denmark is not free. Danish healthcare is an 8% line item deduction of gross pay. Free healthcare in Denmark does not cover physicals, vision or dental care, and mental health services are only partially covered and only in certain situations. Prescriptions are full price..."

Mikek

t

people of Denmark get the same deal as the people of Greenland, except Greenland also have free dental, in Denmark dental is only free while under 18

of course it is not "free", someone has to pay for it, it is paid by taxes so you either win by not being sick or win by having the taxpayer pay your medical bills

"full price", once it is more than ~$600 in a year the rest is paid for

Isn't that only the prescriptions? Mikek

eat

ng

s

xes

our

ns

yes

eat

ng

s

xes

our

ns

So? Isn't that still pretty durn good? In the US we pay for physicals typ ically which are a small part of payments. Neither vision nor dental are t ypically paid for. Mental health services are only paid for at a cursory l evel... they will pay for a handful of visits and then you are on your own.

I only wish we had national healthcare in the US. Here we have "green" hea lthcare. If you have the "green", you get the care. If you don't, you are out of luck.

People talk about "free" emergency room care as being adequate for those wh o can't pay. There are so many things wrong with that it's too much for th is discussion.

Medical care in the US is abysmal considering what we are capable of doing and what the current system costs us. But we have middle class health insu rance which placates most people. If you are working and your employer pay s for your insurance, it feels close to being "free". But that is an illus ion. Once you get sick for a long enough time you can and will lose your c ompany paid for insurance. Then you have to pay your own premiums on top o f paying the co-pays, the deductibles and the items just plain not covered.

A friend of mine died from leukemia after her insurance company stopped pay ing their share. The treatment was working, but the company changed their mind and stopped payment. The doctors argued for her and she got payment b ack after some months but by then it was too late and she died a few months later.

I know another person who had cancer and got audited by the IRS because his deductions were so high from all the charges insurance didn't cover.

Medical insurance needs to go.

--

  Rick C. 

  --+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  --+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

You didn't read the article. A quote from the article, "Free healthcare in Denmark does not cover physicals, vision or dental care,"

The latest thing forced on my private insurance by Obamacare regulations was zero cost prescriptions for" I think the labeled them preventatives" it said, I no longer had to pay for my cholesterol lowering medicine. Yep saved me $3.42 a month on that prescription. On the other hand my insurance premium increased $76 a month. I managed to pay for my families private health insurance most of the since 1981. There were a few times when we had a job that paid part of the premium. But mostly we paid our own premium and still managed to save money on what was often below or slightly above the national median income.

Just to give some idea of the cost of an Obamacare healthcare policy compared to a private policy. My good BCBS policy is $12,144, it has a $10,000 deductible/max out of pocket, but then everything is paid. I just put all my families info into an ACA calculator. The premium for an Obamacare policy with a $6,300 deductible/max out of pocket, is $31,730 or 2.6 times the cost of a private policy. (They go a lot higher in other zip codes. Ex: Columbia SC. cost $43,209) Now, even though the insurance company gets $31,730, the insured that earned $57,000 only pays $4,292 per year. The taxpayers pay the rest at $27,438. I find this incredible, and maybe hard to beleive, if you care to verify for your zip code or Columbia SC. 29203. Try, >

There are others or you can go right to Marketplace.gov. Mikek

Great

ting

he

e,

as

t

taxes

your

l

ions

or

typically which are a small part of payments. Neither vision nor dental a re typically paid for. Mental health services are only paid for at a curso ry level... they will pay for a handful of visits and then you are on your own.

healthcare. If you have the "green", you get the care. If you don't, you are out of luck.

You are saying one fine day the ACA plan finally kicked in and made your dr ug a no co-payment item and that same day your insurance company raised you r rates $76 to cover that?

The median income puts you in a position you *should* be able to pay for ca re... as long as you are health. If you had private insurance before the A CA had anyone on your policy gotten sick and needed significant care at the end of your term you could expect to see HUGE rate increases or just plain denial of coverage. It was only because of the ACA insurance companies ca n't drop you for putting in claims when your policy is up for renewal.

If the private policy is so much cheaper, even if it is apples to oranges ( different deductable and OOPMax) why would you go for the ACA plan? What i s different about the two?

I used your link and for TN, 38572 there would be no financial help for a s ingle person making $57,000 a year and the ACA Silver plan would be $6,333 a year. The Bronze plan is about half that. That page refers to an "actua rial value" which is the approx percentage of the total medical costs that would be paid for a "typical" user. For the Silver plan it is 70% for the Bronze it is 60%.

How does your BCBS plan compare? Sounds to me like something is wrong with these comparisons.

Part of the issue with insurance is that it should help people get medical care when they have issues affording it. With huge deductibles and out of pocket expenses it still makes medical care intimidating for many even when they have insurance.

The part I really don't like is that very few people are willing to step up to the plate and say, "Yes, we need to fix this". Of the few that do, the y want to replace it all with a overarching Medicare. Personally, I'd rath er have something like the British have which just pays for medical treatme nts and comes out of taxes. In our case I think it is reasonable to tax bu sinesses at a similar level to the insurance premiums they pay now. The bu sinesses will see no net change so they can't complain.

The ones complaining will be the insurance companies. They would start tal king about the death squads!

--

  Rick C. 

  -+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
  -+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209