Tuesday, October 7, 2025

This Might Be Hard To Believe (Updated with more health insurance news)

 https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/crime/charlotte-nc-charter-school-bus-driver-arrested-9-30-2025/275-884f39d5-a427-41f0-8bff-3ad3a81d984e

Who could have imagined that hiring a guy named Leetwain Tait, AKA Ms Sharon as a school bus driver would not be an excellent idea.   

  https://www.wcnc.com/article/news/crime/charlotte-nc-charter-school-bus-driver-arrested-9-30-2025/275-884f39d5-a427-41f0-8bff-3ad3a81d984e

The DFL messaging around health insurance premiums is that they will increase exponentially if the current CR passes.   The lie in this messaging is that the True premiums have been obscured by the government subsidies.  The whole P-BO care narrative was a lie.  Premiums didn't decrease, the cost was simply transferred to taxpayers which hid the actual premium.   I cannot believe that these subsidies didn't artificially raise insurance premiums.     More competition, more options, and less government seem like the answers.   Until them, don't believe the lie.  Premiums aren't rising, they've always been this high. 

 https://x.com/brian_blase/status/1975602658196005342?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 "We added 2013 to this figure. It shows the average premium for this 50-year-old enrollee prior to Obamacare. Obamacare caused a 47% premium increase for her in 2014, with escalating premiums (picked up by the federal taxpayer) since."

 

  Bar chart titled Almost Entire Obamacare Premium Increases Paid for by Taxpayers COVID Credits displays annual average premiums in dollars on the y-axis from 2013 to 2026 for a 50-year-old enrollee. Blue bars represent enrollee share starting low in 2013 and decreasing over time. Orange segments show COVID credits in 2021 and 2022. Gray bars indicate government share increasing significantly post-2014. Percentages like 47 percent for 2014 original Obamacare effect and 89.3 percent for 2025 taxpayer share are labeled on bars. Source noted as U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Health Insurance Marketplace Calculator with KFF data.

 To be clear, P_BO care raised prices (and kept them going up), but the taxpayers paid for the P-BO care increases.  What an absolute freaking scam.   Just like the housing market in 2008, of course health care "premiums" went up (along with profits) because the taxpayers were giving them free money.  

 

 

 

 

 https://6abc.com/post/vineland-nj-man-arrested-possessing-explosives-outside-washington-dc-cathedral/17946554/

It's still early, but what are the odds that a "right wing extremist" would choose to attack one of the more right leaning versions of SCOTUS?  

 https://x.com/kangminjlee/status/1975216025508659281?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

   A screenshot of an article titled "The downside of diversity" by Robert Putnam, dated Aug. 5, 2007. The text includes a highlighted section discussing civic engagement in diverse communities. No additional visible elements or characters.

 Maybe diversity, for the sake of diversity isn't all it's cracked up to be?  

 https://x.com/joeroganhq/status/1975279893945422083?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

While I agree with the sentiment, I don't think that the ASPL want to "go back to the old America".  
 

 

 

 

 

3 comments:

Dan Trabue said...

Your 2007 article you cited was not by Putnam, I don't think, but someone referring to his research. I couldn't find a source where Putnam exactly makes the claim in your 2007 article cited. That one that begins "It has become increasingly popular" appears to be written by Michael Jonas...

https://www.wcfia.harvard.edu/publications/downside-diversity

Not to say that Putnam may not have reached that conclusion, just that I can't find him making that claim.

As to that counter-claim ("diversity may not be a public strength), here's a helpful article that breaks down some potential problems in the thesis...

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-diversity-create-distrust/

Here is the abstract from Putnam, the one in question, I believe. Just from the abstract, he's noticing a trend, but he's not suggesting causation (correlation does not equal causation, etc). AND he's noticing that any temporary lack of distrust is something that can be overcome, not something that MUST come with diversity.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x

I suspect the matter is much more complex than your bumper sticker description. As life usually is.

Here's more and more recent research into the topic which, unsurprisingly, have more diverse findings than initially reported by those who gladly cited Putnam.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9887315/

I have to wonder: In my more liberal circles - admittedly, more urban, more culturally, ethnically, racially and otherwise more diverse than many others' - we find great energy, joy, connection, empowerment, delight, grace and joy in our diverse communities. I wonder if this could be related back to minds that begin with more distrust or fear and those with less distrust and fear?

That would be some interesting research.

Marshal Art said...

I believe that was my congressperson with Maher! I'd prefer she stay on the job. She likes TV too much.

Craig said...

Well done, you've managed to ignore the literal words literally used in favor of speculation. Good job. I get that you have a hard time understanding that which is outside of your little echo chamber, but there's nothing wrong with pointing out irony.

FYI, I am all for "diversity" as long as it's not forced and isn't limited to superficial traits.

I wonder, how you live with so many prejudices assumptions about those you do not know. The amount of pride and hubris you show with crap like this is astounding, perhaps a little humility.