>>>Right - now tell that to the GOP, who keeps trying to make massive cuts to these programs.
>
>The Medicare "cuts" attributed to GOP are via PAYGO, a law dating back to 1990 requiring new proposals to be cost-neutral or offset by reductions from other funds. Run the math and the GOP $1.4T deficit effort does seem to trigger the maximum permitted 4% cut to Medicare and other programs, with $25B being the Medicare 4%.
>
>However, PAYGO does have an out clause: government can waive this requirement on itself. There's binary political disruptive reasons why it can't go in the current bill but they could do it via the Senate with 60 votes- as long as DNC co-operates. Which in any normal morality it would have to after decrying the alternative.
>
>>>..except that the GOP is as I type this attempting to get rid of the individual mandate - which is the glue that holds it all together.
>
>It *should* be the glue holding it together, until you check out who's actually paying the penalties and all the exceptions and escape hatches. I despaired at the weakness of the mandate with the extensions and avoidances. Sure enough, Obamacare was in a death spiral when Trump came along and had it been Clinton, huge additional funds would have been needed- which also would trigger PAYGO fwiw.

Until you understand that ObamaCare was not and is not in a 'death spiral' this conversation will be pointless. The GOP has been saying that it's in a 'death spiral' all along and I can not stress to you enough that this is simply untrue...especially now with enrollment up 174% despite the fact that the GOP has cut the enrollment time in 1/2, then stripped all the money used to advertise this change away so people wouldn't find out about it until it was too late. There are those in congress (and also the orange clown in the white house) who want to say that enough times that you will eventually believe it - but it is simply untrue. Now if the GOP gets away with doing things to sabotage it or pass laws to simply get rid of it and screw 10's of millions of people (WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN TRYING TO DO FOR 8 YEARS) - then yeah of course it will fail...duh. I'm not saying it's perfect either - there are things about it that could be better - and if you take a look at the problems that do exist with it you'll see that those are the things that the GOP members have put in there. You realize that these jackasses have tried to repeal it over 50 times now right?

>>>Just because its a repeated explanation does not make it a valid reason. "lesser of two evils" is not only untrue it's ridiculously obviously untrue.
>
>Sorry but you're not an oracle who gets to determine the facts and there's no dispute. By Bill's logic, HRC was the worse candidate. If you wanted to argue his point, you could try- he has laid out precise objections more than once.

There is no 'logic' that would make HRC a worse president than Donald Trump. If that's Bill's logic this his logic is very flawed. This was obvious before the election - it's 'duh' territory now that Trump is in office.

>>>The Alabaman GOP will be too busy endorsing child molesters (like they're doing right now).

>Do you mean Moore? What do you say about Franken, in that case?

I say than only an idiot would think that the problem with Moore is the same as the problem with Fraken. Not making excuses for Fraken - but we're talking about two totally different things with two totally different people who have responded two totally different ways.

>What about Bill Clinton,

No excuses for that either - but same as above. You understand that molesting a child is a tad different than an affair with an adult I hope. And Bill Clinton is not running for office right now either is he? So we're back to whataboutism again.

>if mere accusation is enough to damn Moore because he's on the other side of the binary divide from you?

No. It's the 7 women, 30+ witnesses and the deeply sourced story. Oh sorry make that an entire shopping mall of witnesses and 9 women (so far). And he's a child molester ...well probably a serial child molester. I have a problem with such a person holding office. You would think he's saying 9/11 happened because of sodomy and the fact he was kicked off the bench as a judge twice would be enough , not to mention some of his insane rulings he made (you can look that up and be horrfied)-- but not if it means you get a republican in congress - because it appears that they value a republican in the seat more than that of the life of a child.

>I'm sure that everybody agrees it's abhorrent and disqualifies him- if it's true.

That sir is total bullshit. Trump is still supporting him and will no matter what - and the governor of Alabama (who is a woman!) has said that she will support him AND that she has no reason to not believe the women victims - she said this to reporters on national T.V.!. The Alabama GOP is standing behind him too. B.S. B.S. B.S. And by the way IT"S TRUE.

>But how awful the world would be if candidates could be taken down at will by accusation of impropriety days or weeks before the vote.

You're not one of these people that doubts the validity of the story because of when it came out are you? If so we can have a discussion about that and I will gladly explain it all to you.

>>>..then the problem is with the loopholes that allow this behavior right?
>
>US law requires corporates and individuals to pay tax on worldwide income. What's happening is that the income gets booked under a foreign company in a lower tax jurisdiction. It's not income of the US entity until repatriated, and they're not repatriating it. Meanwhile the stash appears in the financial statements where it boosts share value despite not a cent of US tax paid on it.
>
>Could this be tightened? Certainly- but then the sneak lawyers and accountants would come up with something else, all driven by perverse incentives caused by abnormally high corporate tax. Taxation is Rube Goldberh enough without provoking additional complications!

It's always been like whac-o-mole - but that's no reason to give up, nor is it a reason to reduce the corporate tax rate and make up for it by increasing the tax rate of the poor and taking away their health care.