12:53 am, April 21, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 15
       

  • Why 26????
    Woodbridge
    Why is the federal government forcing children to assume responsibility for their own health care at age 26? Why not 30? or 45? Better yet, keep them on their parents policies until they turn 65 and can collect Medicare. Given the self absorbed entitlement mentality of generation whatever, and particularly their parents, it makes no sense to expect them to ever assume adult responsibilities. They certainly are not prepared to do so at the tender age of 26 when previous genreations had already been in the workforce for 2-8 years, started paying taxes, SS, saving for the future etc. These tender young people need to be sheltered by their parents from cradel to grave and all of us hard working taxpayers need to just plan on working till we drop in order to finance someone elses slacker children. After all, it is not as if we are entitled to keep any of our own money beyond what enlightened progressives decide we need.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • because
    Zed
    Average age of a person when graduating from college is now 25. Why not cut it off at 21, 18, or even 16. Kids are getting jobs at 16 so lets cut it off at 16. You have to make the cut off somewhere, you will never have everyone agree on what it should be.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Would that be the 5 or 7 year college plan?
    Woodbridge
    You kind of make my point for me. Graduate from high school, usually around age 17-18 Take college seriously, get a degree by 21-23 and get on with life. Personally, i would make the cut off after college graduation or age 21, whichever comes first.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Age to get off parent's medical plan
    Moderate
    Actually, Zed makes the opposite point of what you say mr. Woodbridge. He was being very sarcastic. Read between the lines------------------------------------------- As far as the average age to graduate high school that is now 18-19. That is because officials raised the age to start first grade to about 6+ years old. it was 5+ many years ago. Therefore, the average age, if college is done in 4 years and if the person starts right out of high school, is 22-23 years old. Reality is that college graduation is [probably later due to possible military service, remedial courses, change of major, etc.------------------------------------------------------------- Even when they get out of school, it is difficult to get a job with medical benefits. Much of that is caused by the Bush depression that still has a huge effect on the ability to find that kind of job.-------------------------------------------------------------- Just out of curiosity, do you have any children who would be affected by this change? If not, I fully understand the selfish reason for your position.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Woodbridge
    Linda
    I agree with you. I can understand through college age (23-24), but 26 seems high. These kids are whining about not getting a job in the bad economy....I got one in 1983-1984 when unemployment was running 11.5 %, not the measey 9.25% it is now. You got a job, maybe not your dream job, maybe not at your dream salary, but you got a job. And just coming out of college, I didn't qualify for unemployment. Just think, the kids today are the one who will be taking care of us in our old age (Drs., Nurses, Nursing Home attendants, etc.). Scary thought huh?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Got a job at 11.5% unemployment
    Moderate
    You were very fortunate to get a job then. Many people could not. Did it also include medical benefits? I am very confused by your unemployment statistics. I googled US unemployment statistics by year. According to those stats official unemployment in 1983 was 9.6%. In 1984 it was 7.51%. Where does 11.5% come from?
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Dependency Class
    Tea Partier
    I was fascinated to read today that Cuba is laying off 500,000 government workers, because Fidel has finally realized that Socialism doesn't work. When are the powers in Washington going to finally wake up and realize what Cuba, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Great Britain, & the old Soviet Union have come to realize: Keynesian economics/Socialism/Marxism doesn't work. It will eventually collapse under its own weight. It makes everybody wards of the state, and there is no incentive to innovate or produce, because there are no rewards, only punishments for deviating from government policy.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • to Tea Partier
    Moderate
    Neither does sweat shops and monopolies work. That is how we got depressions every 20 years and the great depression which started with the stock market crash of 1929. Keyensian economics, which has some socialistic aspects, was increased to reduce the effects of hands off economics that you advocate. Of course, since you do not believe in government economics, you probably do not believe in public schools, roadbuilding using government funds, public transportation, inspection of foods, durgs, vitamins, etc. to make sure they are safe and do what they are supposed to do. That is also socialism.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Public Schools
    Tea Partier
    Don't get me started on Public schools. They have turned into Marxist indoctrination centers right out of the Soviet Union. You can get thrown out of school for bringing a Bible or praying, but they are forcing 6 year olds to learn about homosexuality, and their parents don't even have the right to know about that. I absolutely support abolishing the "Dept. of Reeducation" (got to get those evil Christian beliefs out of children's heads). Return control to the states & local communities, where it was meant to be. Do you support a monopoly on health care insurance? That's what your beloved Obama & Nancy Pelosi want. 65% of Americans oppose Obamacare,, because they don't trust the Federal Government to have that much power over people. I could go on, but I'll stop now.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • stu.c.charney@irs.gov
    Moderate
    I will get you started on public schools. Whether they are federal supported or state supported that is still socialism. Are you for eliminating public schools? If not, then you are supporting a socialistic idea.------------------------------------------ I do not know where you get the idea that you can be thrown out of a public school for bringing a Bible to school or even praying as long as you do not disrupt the other students or call attention to yourself. Of course, if you make a public display, then, of course, you are disrupting class. What you really advocate is class Bible reading and advocacy of your Christian principles. You do not care about those who are not Christian. So stop giving me your sob story about reading the Bible. Do it privately.------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am unaware that 6 year olds are learning about homosexuality, but they may be learning to tolerate beliefs other than yours. Hopefully, the new generation will realize that a gay person has the same rights as a heterosexual.---------------------- The only ones who call Christian beliefs evil are those of your lack of tolerance who are in fantasy land and some other radicals in different religions.---------------------- And where does a monopoly on medicare come from? Your fantasy land? And where does obamacare come from? The evil monster from the radical right? There was a law passed that allows those who cannot afford it the right to have medical insurance, possibly free of charge or at reduced rates. The companies that provide it are in private enterprise. many of these unfortunates have been laid off from jobs as a result of, your friend, the Bush depression. I have heard that it may be extended in the form of a double dip. The law also provides for mandatory insurance and forces employers to pay a penalty if they do not cover their people. It is nice for these people to have coverage instead of being a burden on health providers who must treat the uninsured (at minimum stabilize them) without proper compensation. Of course you do not care about these people.------------------------- Hope this response gives you something to think about.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Health Care
    Fran
    Must say, I agree with all of you.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Stu
    Tea Partier
    Stu: You need to wake up & realize that your beliefs are in the minority in this country. More and more people are saying that the Founders had it right when they believed in LIMITED Federal government, not an all encompassing Federal Beaureaucracy. The Progressives want single payer health care. Obamacare is the well understood "first step" to eventually getting to Single Payer (Socialized medicine). Barney Frank even admitted that in a speech, which was caught on audio. It's easy to be charitable with other people's money. Lady Margaret Thatcher famously said "The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money to spend". We believe in charity. But it should come from the heart, giving your own money, not taking another person's money & giving it to a poor person, and thinking that makes you charitable. Even Democrats are saying that Obamacare needs to be repealed, because it violates the Constitution, which Obama & Congress took an oath to uphold. Just because something sounds good to you doesn't make it Constitutional.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Tea partier
    Moderate
    i am glad that you have a statistical analysis to show that I am in the minority. Please give it to us. You have very little knowledge of my political beliefs and assume quite alot.............................................................................................. It may be true that more and more people... However, going from 1-2% is not a majority. And no one is talking abouit an all encompassing bureaucracy except in your fantasies. There is a strong central government that has evolved since the founding fathers. As far as I know this is constitutional. At least I have not heard it to be unconstitutional by the supreme court. It may be unconstitutional by the supreme court of tea, but that is a different story.................................................. I was unaware that the progressives want a single payor system. There may be some radicals that do, but they are in the minority. Of course the radical right does not care about those that cannot get health insurance, many due to the Bush depression. many of the radial right want to go back to the sweatshops and the robber barrons............................................................................................. Again I ask you. Are you against public schools and road building? These are socialistic in nature as the use taxes to support projects for the general welfare? Perhaps yiou would like to eliminate various regulators who make sure our food and drugs are safe?........................................................................................... Yes there are some Democrats for the repeal of the law that provides medical insurance for those too poor to get it. And there are Republicans who support the concept and law. So what?................................................................................. Just because you believe something is unconstitutional does not make it so. The courts determine that issue and not you.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Follow Up
    Tea Partier
    Jan Schakowsky is another Progressive who has said that they want Single Payer Health Care, but had to go through this first step to get there. So I say again, the majority of Americans don't want some Federal Beaureaucrat having that much control over your health & life. Progressives are big advocates for a monopoly. They just want themselves to be that monopoly that you have to go to.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • to Tea partier
    Moderate
    Again, your radical right propaganda is pure nonsense. Most progressives do not want a single payer program. Most progressives do not want a single bureaucrat having control over your life and health. The radical right, eg. tea partier, do not care about the condition of those who cannot afford medical insurance. They do not care about a monopoly of private industry as long as they get theirs.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }