If "Healthcare is a Right" then why is there a penalty or a fine ?
If you can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it, you must pay a fee called the individual shared responsibility payment. (The fee is sometimes called the "penalty," "fine," or "individual mandate.")Percentage of income2.5% of household incomeMaximum: Total yearly premium for the national average price of a Bronze plan sold through the MarketplacePer person$695 per adult$347.50 per child under 18Maximum: $2,085If one can't afford healthcare how is one going to pay the fine ? So "healthcare is not a right" as the Left claims it is.
Children with low intelligence grow up to be prejudiced.Right-wing views make the less intelligent feel 'safe'.Analysis of more than 15,000 people.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html
Trump assumed the Presidency on the back of innumerable claims of what he would do, when he would do it. Not least of which was that people would get "tired of winning".Trump's legislative agenda has involved neither setting tone, nor policy detail and letting the same Republicans he railed against during the campaign set their own agenda and write their own laws with little of his involvement, culminating in a thus far spectacular failure of a healthcare bill; which is wildly unpopularHe has reversed on several key positions, and has ceased significantly pushing on others: seeming to simply be driven by achieving a "victory" where a victory is not doing what he said, but doing anything of note, which is odd considering he billed himself as the ultimate dealmaker.He is taking credit for the economy left to him by Obama and remains unchanged due to no substantive economic policy or law changes; and has shirked responsibility when things go wrong, in military actions, legislative agenda, government and now absolved himself of responsibility of blame for any collapse to the US healthcare system under his watch.So, given that he's had 6 months, for which he has nothing substantial to show other than a supreme court nominee, and a half implemented executive order that runs out in a few months. He's emboldening US enemies, and appears to be reducing the willingness of European allies to work with the U.S. On top of this; many of his actions have been naive or even stupid; including actions that any one could tell would end up undermining his own position such as the firing of James Comey.So the question is:When will the U.S. "start winning" as boasted by Trump during the campaign?
I support LGBT rights. I like small government with less social programs. I'm not real crazy about immigrants (especially Muslims). I respect most religions of the world (unless they are fascist in their doctrine) but I don't believe in prayer in school or government. I'm pro choice. I support capital punishment.
Their only comebacks are:- "Russia Russia Russia!" Nevermind that it can't be proven, and wouldn't be anything abnormal or illegal even if it were proven.- "Obamacare is failing. Fix it now!" Nevermind that Trump said, "I'm waiting for the bill with pen in hand."
http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/european-nations-points-entry-struggle-contain-migrant-crisis/?utm_content=buffer01991&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=lifezette_bufferEuropean Nations at Points of Entry Grow Desperate as Migrant Crisis RagesGreek authorities put down 'uprising' at refugee processing center, Italian officials lash out at EU neighbors
Should we allow a Gattaca-like world to come into existence? Like human cloning, the idea of genetically modifying our offspring still falls within the realms of illegality and taboo. Its supporters call it human trait selection; it’s opponents derogatively refer to it as designer babies. Either way, it would allow parents to select the characteristics of their progeny, including non-medical attributes like hair and eye color, height, intelligence, greater empathy, sexual orientation, personality type, and basically any other genetically influenced trait.From I09
With science advancing, men no longer have a need to have a penis. We have growth hormones that can make up for the lack of testicles and other appendages that would normally be responsible for male maturation. Having the male penis, only puts men at risk of prostate cancer and other disorders. In addition, the male human penis is extremely vulnerable and is easily susceptible to injury that could cause serious harm to the male. Protecting males from harm is not the only reason the penis should be removed though.Many unwanted children are born due to males and females procreating with reckless abandon. With the removal of the male penis, we would reduce the births of unwanted children to a minimum and would ensure that the majority of pregnancies were planned through in-vitro fertilization.While the removal of the male penis sounds extreme and traumatizing to the male, the benefit it would have to society cannot be ignored.We should considering removing the male penis from future generations in hopes of creating a better society for all involved.
In the past few decades, the popular belief in the area of organizational behaviour and organizational psychology has been that happy workers are better workers. However, new research at the University of Alberta shows that sad workers are more productive.