Oh, and swing state votes are 10 times as significant as solidly red/blue state votes. If you want Trump to win the split the vote here. If you want another option then swap your vote with someone in a state that's already solidly held and you'll do no damage. Call someone in New York or California and have them vote for Johnson for you, and vote for Clinton...because the alternative is (and I'll do this again) TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE!!!
When Richard Nixon was president the health care insurance system was converted from a not-for-profit system to a for profit system. On one of the Nixon tapes the question was asked how that conversion would work and the reply from the CEO of Blue Cross/Blue Shield was heard to reply that BC/BS would continue collect premiums but in order make a profit they would deny service to members. Nixon replied "that sounds like that would work", and the for-profit industry was off to the races. There is about a 30% disparity in the amount that is collected that goes to bonuses for CEOs and profits for shareholders and the amount that is paid out for actual care. The biggest problem for providers (doctors, nurses) has always been the insurers. There is no reason for them to take less - they actually could do better under ColoradoCare, but that's a guess.
To summarily compare ColoradoCare to other poorly run government health care systems (the VA comes to mind) is inaccurate and unfair and smacks of Reaganesque "the government is the problem" rhetoric. Government can work for the people - no - SHOULD work for the people. We simply cannot allow continued mismanagement and cronyism, and we do that by un-electing the schmucks and electing statesmen/women.
Banning Lewis has not been developed because it is in a floodplain, and will require close to a billion dollars in mitigation to be safe for development. As soon as Norwood, the Mayor, and City Council figure out how to shift that financial burden to the taxpayers, development will begin. Until then developers will just have to keep building on landslides. Plenty of corporate welfare as it is, at least TABOR offers some protection for the average taxpayer.
Exactly right. Not a level playing field. Developers with a metro district mil levy get to pretend they're a quasi government entity and get tax-free municipal bond interest rates and after they establish a 20, 30 or 40 mil tax for 40 years for the entire area by having a "special" TABOR election whereby only the developer votes in the election. Then they get to get a sweet loan and are treated the same as a City borrowing money thereby reducing up front investment and risk while guaranteeing that the future residents will make those loan payments with their tax assessment or else get a lean on their property. Meanwhile, because the developer didn't have to make the same out of hide initial investment as those without those benefits, he can offer the property at an artificially low sale price. Most would-be buyers don't see the massive mil levy until they're at the closing table. City Council has created a complex web of an uneven playing field all over the City. They can then use those loan proceeds to build sub-par roads which the City takes over maintenance on a after a 2-year warranty all the while making payments from residents who had no say in a mil levy that's 8-fold of the City mil levy.
Regarding disdain for TABOR, would you prefer to have corrupt politicians under influence of their campaign financiers deciding how much of your money they'll take and distribute as corporate welfare?
The issue is these clubs are illegally "selling" recreational cannbis. The city of Colorado Springs prohibits the sell of recreational cannabis. They are having people "donate" $25 to them and in return getting weed. Or having people "buy points" 1 point = $1 and they can then use their points to buy cannabis. Hence why they are an issue... People "donating" for cannbis don't need a medical card like the city requires to buy within the city limits.
Can't run a government without funds, and, if I remember correctly, Mr Miller, you're the one who called for a level playing field. Special districts are far from fair and equal as far as beneficiaries are concerned, and JH make a good point for equanimity within the city limits.
I'm not into raising taxes, per se - but I'm not a Grover Norquist "let's shrink the Federal Government to a size where we can drown it in the bathtub" fan either...and that looks and sounds like what Jailbird Bruce had in mind when he penned TABOR and ran that con into the Colorado Constitution.
My suggestion? Raise the city sales tax. Sales tax is indeed the only fair tax because it is a use tax - you buy a clunker, you pay tax on a clunker. You buy a Lamborghini you pay tax on a Lamborghini. Sounds fair enough to me. For that matter, let's do that nationwide and put the Federal deficit to rest. Oh, and all you rich "patriots" - no more hiding your dollars offshore!
Mr. Hightower! It was an honor to meet you in San Angelo at a Dem Party meet arranged by my late, close friend, Perry Flippin. I had suffered a heart attack a few days earlier, and the heat at the crowded venue didn't help my condition, so I had to leave early...but back to the Postal Service. You are absolutely correct that the USPS has been torpedoed by the very competitors (can we spell UPS and FedEx?) through their minions in Congress who are bought and paid for.
I for one have had problems with UPS damaging a family antique then refusing to take responsibility for it, and FedEx ain't spotless, either. For my money the USPS is the only way to fly!
Tannim...What's Aleppo? And what does that level of international ignorance mean to you? I was a Bernie supporter, but I'm also a realist - Johnson can't win, Stein can't win, and under no circumstances I can imagine can or should Trump win. Look up the clinical definition of sociopathy/narcissism anywhere you choose - if there was a picture next to it that picture would be of Donald Trump.
I have no desire to live in the police state he proposes. I have heard nothing constructive in any of his divisive rants, I haven't seen his tax returns yet (he has business dealings all over the world - who really owns him and what would that mean to our democracy?), I have no desire to see his family-style primped and airbrushed nepotism in the White House, and his stance on nuclear weapons is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.
This egocentric buffoon needs to have his ass handed to him on election day by Hillary Clinton. I'm not a huge fan of hers, but damn, son, use your head! The Ship of State will continue to sail regardless of who wins the election, but there are going to be casualties overboard...let's try to minimize the damage.
Passing Amendment 69 will have two immediate effects: an exodus of health care providers who don't wish to work for a medical "minimum wage", and an immediate and potentially unfair increase in state taxes/fees - even on income items that weren't previously taxed. Living on a fixed income? Too bad - they're coming for it. Oh and don't forget those 512,000 people currently getting SNAP benefits, as you'll be paying for their health care too.
"Moving On" in the liberal progressive mind: "Triple the existing levy and issue bonds..."
At least you're predictable, JH.
I'm with you on the PBMP. Here's the homework... Name three governor's and two senators that would do Uncle Teddy proud!
ColoradoCare (amendment 69) was designed by a group of Coloradans with no connection to any corporation, industry or political party. It would create a non-profit cooperative owned by the people of Colorado and run by a 21-member board of trustees elected by the people of Colorado. It would simplify our healthcare payment system while keeping our doctors, specialists, clinics and hospitals as independent businesses competing for your business.
ColoradoCare is our chance to get the big insurance companies and their bureaucracy, waste, profits, lobbyists and campaign contributions out of our healthcare. ColoradoCare would cover every Coloradan with top quality healthcare, with no deductibles, while costing us less than we pay now.
You owe it to yourself and your fellow Coloradans to learn more about ColoradoCare and vote for it in November. www.ColoradoCare.org
Kudos...Kudos...Kudos to asawatcher, thank you for that well written and factual response :)
Tannim...WTF!!! What an unfactual....undefendable comment!! Legislation to promote women's rights is not political or gender exploitation, it is indeed to promote equality.
Just another form of censorship. Over the last two years the Gazette has become a cheerleader for the people/companies that own this city. Influencing voters so they don't get in the way of city giveaways is worth every penny Anschutz paid for the Gazette.
I recently moved to the Spings and saw you on the news. I was so excited until I saw there was a membership fee. What if I find that your establishment and I are not a fit?
"Odin brings up a very good question. My question to Odin, ok, what is the Second Amendment about?" - Lil Mick
The Second is about the ability to keep and bear arms. This right is an extension of our inherent AKA natural or fundamental right to self-defense and community defense and it exists with or without the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment merely protects this existing right. One of the reasons it protects this right is because of community defense.
"it was originally about protecting the rights of citizens to arm themselves as a militia, keeping the militia, or military at that time separate from the government, enabling the citizenry to protect themselves from a oppressive government."
The military was never intended to be separate from the government. Please, read the Constitution. Being able to defend against an oppressive government is just one facet of a militia -- they were also for providing for immediate defense against invasions and insurrections, among other things.
"The Supreme Court and those who oppose gun legislation have made it clear, the need for a militia separate from the government is no longer necessary,"
Please, point to where the Supreme Court has said this.
" therefore that part of the Second Amendment can be ignored, it is not necessary.
So, since that is no longer the purpose, I argue, there is no longer a purpose for the Second Amendment."
You confuse the first 13 words of the Second Amendment with the reason the right exists. They are not the same thing. The first 13 words give one reason the right must be protected, not the reason it exists. Remember, the Bill of Rights does not grant any rights, it recognizes rights we already have.
"What we now have is a constitutional protection on a privately manufactured and privately marketed product. We have no such protection for any other privately manufactured and privately marketed products."
Except for the whole unreasonable search and seizure bit. Seems to me that homes are privately manufactured and privately marketed, yet there are Constitutional protections about when they can be searched, when they can be taken, and if we can be forced to share them. And even if true, so what? It doesn't mean that we can have any arms we please. It doesn't mean there cannot be any laws, restrictions, or limitations.
Therefore, I find your arguments to be extremely flawed and therefore not worth the electrons used to express them.
I love how they added "all" to the "flora" portion. I doubt very seriously that anyone that grows veggies, is doing it indoors. They will only send the swat team out for cannabis, otherwise, they will look even more stupid if they spend 300k to send out the team for cucumbers. Nice try on hiding the blatant discrimination though. I don't give a crap about their "fire ordinance" I will live by A20, not by City Council and the Mayors made up rules. Thank you never much...
All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation