all 15 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 30 points 2 days ago (12 children)

How did I guess it would primarily go to republicans run states?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 days ago (1 child)

    and

    The primary recipients of the checks will be people who earn above 400% of the federal poverty line

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 2 days ago

    this is the $5000 checks that would have never been authorized by congress.

    some bullshit made up 'refund' going to red state residents who aren't exactly 'poor', and thus more likely to not be an evil librul or darker-skinned, packaged with propaganda bullshit signed by lord shitstain himself, set to arrive as the mid-term campaign enters the final lap.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 2 days ago (8 children)

    Didn't they just kick a whole ton of people off of ACA? Like not even a week ago?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 days ago (7 children)

    Yes, because they had paid their premiums but didn't use the service. Big brains at work here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    Some trump lackey was on a TV show saying that having an ACA policy and not using it was clearly fraud as it was "statistically impossible". .... As we and anyone who understands insurance knows, those are the people who pay for the ones who do have to use it. Healthy people, particularly men, don't go to the doctor for preventative care or generally unless they have to, but with the abusive horror of pricing in the US system, they must have insurance to make it less likely they are financially destroyed by an unexpected illness or accident. So, the Trump heathens know they're lying, and just want to undermine the ACA because one, they want Americans to suffer and die apparently and two, OBAMA.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago* (1 child)

    i got a warning here last week saying the same thing. gonna lose it if i don't use it ("it" being a rather minimal-coverage, non-aca plan, that happens to be partially public-funded, run by a nearby regional clinic).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    Not that it's an equal comparison, but maybe that's why they're so against medicare for all? They think more people paying into the system is worse (which is the opposite of reality).

    No, I realize they're against it to hurt people, just trying to find rationality where there isn't any.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 1 point 2 days ago (2 children)
  • [–] 13 points 2 days ago
    [–] 10 points 2 days ago

    I'd cash the check, and still happily vote against every MAGA on my ballot.

  • source