Rapidly Growing Healthcare Solution Keeps Government Out of Medical Costs

The following post is sponsored by Liberty HealthShare. The story of one of today’s most rapidly growing healthcare solutions dates back to the early 1980’s when an Ohio pastor was involved in a tragic auto accident. Left unable to afford the vast amount of medical bills that resulted from the accident, the pastor wasn’t sure how he was going to pay his bills. Fortunately, word quickly got out to those who were familiar with pastor’s work with alcoholics and drug addicts. Within 45 days, all of the pastor’s medical bills were paid in full thanks to the compassion and caring of his fellow Christians. The Christian principle to ‘bear one another’s burdens’ as stated in Galatians 6:2 led this pastor to starting the first modern healthcare sharing ministry of its kind. For many people, when they are introduced to something different from what is familiar, there is often a sense of uneasiness and apprehension. These feelings of uneasiness and apprehension are feelings that are commonplace for consumers when it comes to their healthcare. While, in general, many of us are more comfortable keeping things the way they are and the way in which we have become accustomed, most of us

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.breitbart.com

Dem governors sue the federal government to save tax breaks for the rich


Democratic governors in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Maryland are suing the federal government because they don’t believe Congress has the right to make tax policy.


The Republican tax cut caps the deduction for state taxes at $10,000. About 70% of taxpayers in most high tax states are not affected because they pay less than the cap in state and local taxes. But the top 30% of earners are going to be forced to pony up, leading to substantially less revenue for states.



The irony is delicious. Democrats, who are always complaining that the rich don’t pay their “fair share” of taxes are suing to stop the rich from paying a fair share of taxes.


The state and local tax deduction for wealthier residents allowed these governors to jack up tax rates because those paying the most knew that they could write off the excess on their federal tax returns. No more.


Las Vegas Review-Journal:


Without the unlimited deduction, tax-and-spend politicians in locales such as New York fear many high earners will flee to more favorable tax climes or exert pressure on their representatives to reduce levies, particularly sky-high property taxes.


As a result, it’s fourth down and 99 yards to go and they’re throwing what can be charitably described as a wounded- duck Hail Mary.


The lawsuit argues the tax law ignores the longstanding practice that “the federal government’s income tax power was and would remain subject to federalism constraints,” The New York Times reported. One law professor told the Times that the legal action is “an original work of scholarship.”


That’s academic-speak for “they’re out of their bloomin’ minds.” 


 No kidding. In fact, the new tax legislation treats every state precisely the same and doesn’t affect any state tax statute anywhere in the country. The notion that it’s unconstitutional for Congress to write federal tax law, including rules for deductions and write-offs, shouldn’t be taken seriously by a federal judge.


The legal action is just one of many attempts by big-spending state politicians to mitigate the effects of the Trump tax reform. Another gimmick, under discussion in California and New York, would create government “charities” to which taxpayers could donate in lieu of paying state taxes. Expect the IRS to put the kibosh on that scheme.


In the end, of course, blue-state progressives will ignore the simplest and most productive course that might help keep their residents at bay: Reducing the massive tax burdens they’ve imposed to feed their destructive dependence on other people’s money.


There is a law of diminishing returns when it comes to taxes that these blue state Democrats apparently believe they can avoid. The higher you raise tax rates, the percentage increase in revenue goes down. Illinois is a perfect example. Wealthier taxpayers are fleeing the state in record numbers due to the punishing tax burden. So while the rates may increase,  there are fewer people to pay it, leading to lower than predicted revenue.


The suit won’t go anywhere, unless there is a sympathetic federal judge willing to ignore the Constitution and rule in their favor. But it will take a large amount of legal legerdemain to twist the law that much. 


Democratic governors are just going to have to make do with less.


 


Democratic governors in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and Maryland are suing the federal government because they don’t believe Congress has the right to make tax policy.


The Republican tax cut caps the deduction for state taxes at $10,000. About 70% of taxpayers in most high tax states are not affected because they pay less than the cap in state and local taxes. But the top 30% of earners are going to be forced to pony up, leading to substantially less revenue for states.


The irony is delicious. Democrats, who are always complaining that the rich don’t pay their “fair share” of taxes are suing to stop the rich from paying a fair share of taxes.


The state and local tax deduction for wealthier residents allowed these governors to jack up tax rates because those paying the most knew that they could write off the excess on their federal tax returns. No more.


Las Vegas Review-Journal:


Without the unlimited deduction, tax-and-spend politicians in locales such as New York fear many high earners will flee to more favorable tax climes or exert pressure on their representatives to reduce levies, particularly sky-high property taxes.


As a result, it’s fourth down and 99 yards to go and they’re throwing what can be charitably described as a wounded- duck Hail Mary.


The lawsuit argues the tax law ignores the longstanding practice that “the federal government’s income tax power was and would remain subject to federalism constraints,” The New York Times reported. One law professor told the Times that the legal action is “an original work of scholarship.”


That’s academic-speak for “they’re out of their bloomin’ minds.” 


 No kidding. In fact, the new tax legislation treats every state precisely the same and doesn’t affect any state tax statute anywhere in the country. The notion that it’s unconstitutional for Congress to write federal tax law, including rules for deductions and write-offs, shouldn’t be taken seriously by a federal judge.


The legal action is just one of many attempts by big-spending state politicians to mitigate the effects of the Trump tax reform. Another gimmick, under discussion in California and New York, would create government “charities” to which taxpayers could donate in lieu of paying state taxes. Expect the IRS to put the kibosh on that scheme.


In the end, of course, blue-state progressives will ignore the simplest and most productive course that might help keep their residents at bay: Reducing the massive tax burdens they’ve imposed to feed their destructive dependence on other people’s money.


There is a law of diminishing returns when it comes to taxes that these blue state Democrats apparently believe they can avoid. The higher you raise tax rates, the percentage increase in revenue goes down. Illinois is a perfect example. Wealthier taxpayers are fleeing the state in record numbers due to the punishing tax burden. So while the rates may increase,  there are fewer people to pay it, leading to lower than predicted revenue.


The suit won’t go anywhere, unless there is a sympathetic federal judge willing to ignore the Constitution and rule in their favor. But it will take a large amount of legal legerdemain to twist the law that much. 


Democratic governors are just going to have to make do with less.


 




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Dan Bongino Goes Off: Adam Schiff’s a ‘Fraud, Liar and Disgrace – An Embarrassment to Himself” (VIDEO)


Dan Bongino Goes Off: Adam Schiff’s a ‘Fraud, Liar and Disgrace – An Embarrassment to Himself” (VIDEO)

Jim Hoft
by Jim Hoft
July 23, 2018

Former Secret Service official Dan Bongino went off on fraudster, liar Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) today following the latest release of FISA memos this weekend that prove the Obama Deep State began spying on the Donald Trump campaign based on a fraudulent document paid for by Hillary, the DNC and the Obama FBI.

This latest revelation is devastating and could lead to criminal charges against several Obama officials.

Dan Bongino: I believe Schiff is a fraud, a liar, a disgrace. He’s an embarrassment to himself, Congress, the country. Adam Schiff has been the lead hoaxer. He’s been out on television now for a year looking in the face of you, America, and lying to every one of you in an effort to distract the entire country on a hoax Russia scandal. He is a fraud and should be called out as one.

Apparently, Bongino is not a Shiff fan.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning. Guest posting is disabled for security reasons.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Trump Outfoxed Them Again

Trump Outfoxed Them Again
Trump is wise for not falling into democrats’, fake news media and the Deep state’s trap of saying Russia tampered with our election. Russia has tried to impact our elections forever. While 12 Russians were indicted in the Russia collusion investigation, no Americans were indicted. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein stated that Russian tampering had no impact on the outcome of our presidential election. In other words, Trump won fair and square.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://canadafreepress.com/

Bill Nelson Campaign Still Dodging Taxes by Employing No Full-Time Staffers

Entering the final quarter of the midterm election cycle, Florida Democrat Bill Nelson’s reelection campaign was still not employing full-time staffers, it’s newest filing with the Federal Election Commission shows.

The Washington Free Beacon reported earlier this month that Nelson had been using independent contractors instead of employees, allowing it to avoid costly payroll expenditures every other campaign incurs.

Nelson’s latest filing, covering activity from April through the end of June, shows the campaign continued the structure throughout the quarter, making regular payments to contractors for campaign work including fundraising, research, communications, compliance, and strategic planning. There were again no reported disbursements for payroll tax or employee health insurance, costs directly associated with having full-time staffers.

The Nelson campaign criticized the Washington Free Beacon‘s initial report, telling local reporters it was based on "out-of-date information" even though it was based on the most recent information available. The campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the new filing, which further confirms the initial report and shows the practice continued through at least June.

Nelson’s team said it was "a very common start-up model" to staff the campaign with "independent contractors who get paid a contract amount and are on their own for dealing with taxes and benefits." It was the only Democratic reelection campaign to follow the model.

Nelson’s campaign also insisted that it began to replace contractors with full-time employees on July 1, a fact that won’t be verifiable until Nelson’s next filing, which is due in late October, a few weeks before Election Day.

The first filing for Nelson’s opponent, Governor Rick Scott, confirms the Republican’s campaign has operated in a more typical fashion, maintaining a payroll and making the disbursements associated with having full-time employees.

Nelson’s campaign reported just over $1.2 million in operating expenditures for the quarter, far less than Democrats in similar electoral situations but in smaller states. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.), for example, reported more than $3.5 million in operating expenditures for the quarter.

Scott reported nearly $18 million in operating expenditures, though, because it was his first filing of the cycle, which covered all activity this year.

Scott was highly critical of the way Nelson was handling his campaign staff.

"He’s been a hypocrite," Scott said. "Here’s a guy who likes to raise our taxes all the time, Bill Nelson, and at the same time we got a report last week that for his campaign, he’s not even paying his payroll taxes. And on top of that he likes all these big government health care mandates, and he’s not even paying his own employees’ health care."

Campaign veterans strongly disputed Nelson’s notion of it being "very common" to operate without full-time staff, especially in a statewide Florida election. They also questioned whether Nelson was skirting federal labor laws by paying individuals doing regular work for his campaign as though they were contractors.

Labor advocates such as the Campaign Workers Guild have been critical of Democrats who give lip service to labor issues on the campaign trail but then treat workers poorly.

"The Democratic Party, in particular, is a champion of labor rights, except where its own laborers are concerned," the group says. "Campaign workers routinely work more than twice the standard workweek for less than minimum wage and no health care benefits."

Nelson’s campaign had $13.7 million in cash on hand going into July.

The post Bill Nelson Campaign Still Dodging Taxes by Employing No Full-Time Staffers appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://freebeacon.com

Watch: MSNBC panel STUNNED over new poll that shows Trump’s approval at all-time high

President Donald Trump’s approval rating ticked up last week following his contentious summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, stunning an MSNBC panel on Sunday, which alleged the president “defies gravity.”

First, what did the poll show?

The new Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows Trump’s approval rating rose to 45 percent after the Helsinki summit, a 1 percent increase from June. It is the highest mark of Trump’s presidency in the poll, which surveys presidential approval each month.

Meanwhile, the survey found that 52 percent of registered voters disapprove of Trump’s job.

Also, 88 percent of Republicans approve of Trump’s job, a figure only rivaled by former President George W. Bush in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Former President Barack Obama only achieved 81 percent approval by Democrats in the WSJ/NBC poll. Trump earned the approval of only 9 percent of Democrats.

Trump earned the highest marks on his handling of the economy and North Korea, while his work on the border and trade earned middle-of-the-road approval and disapproval. Voters, however, overwhelmingly disapproved of Trump’s handling of Russia and immigrant families at the border.

The poll was conducted over a four-day period beginning July 15, one day before Trump’s meeting with Putin. Polling concluded before the news about Michael Cohen and Carter Page dropped on Friday and Saturday, respectively.

How did the MSNBC panel react?

MSNBC host Kasie Hunt and her panel were shocked over the poll’s results. Hunt said Americans are living in a “different space-time continuum where even gravity works differently.”

“He defines political gravity,” GOP Kevin McLaughlin added, explaining it’s only the East Coast that is outraged with Trump, while “flyover” country supports him and is willing to make sacrifices for the good of the nation.

“So is [Trump] right when he basically says he could walk down Fifth Avenue and shoot people and people would still stand with him? I mean, is there any line?” Hunt asked rhetorically, referring to comments Trump made during his campaign.

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Facebook’s philistines back at it, now censoring art of Flemish masters


Are the leftists running Facebook really that stupid?


According to the Flanders tourist authority, they’re censoring images from Rubens paintings, unable to distinguish art from pornography.



Someone told them “nude, bad,” and not a one of them had sufficient art education to know that these painting represent the pinnacle of Western cultural achievement.


The Brussels tourism officials sent in their protest, via Brussels Times and Belgian news site VRT:



These Rubens works being censored are amazing – artworks so important that they remain studied today, and in the most cutting-edge places.


I was educated in fine art at Santa Monica College, probably the best community college in the country for this, and you bet we studied Rubens.  My professors, who were noted artists in their own right, such as Marc Trujillo, insisted that we go to the Getty Museum and copy Rubens (and other masters) in our art notebooks.  You want to learn to draw?  Your job to start is to go copy Rubens – from the actual drawing or painting itself – and figure out what he was doing, learning every nuance, and doing it over and over to get it down.  Because virtually nobody could draw better than Rubens.  And man, oh, man, do you learn to respect!  Try it!  That’s what art students really do.  Heck, it’s what Velázquez and Delacroix really did.  They all do it.




“Bacchus” by Peter Paul Rubens.


So it really disgusts me to hear that the culturally illiterate weasels over at Facebook, bred on a diet of comics, videogames, and Britney Spears pop videos, are making a hash of things by imagining that the Rubens images of the human body, the nude figures, in the masterpieces worth hundreds of millions on the market, are somehow obscene.  Is it a matter of fat-shaming?  (Rubens’s women are completely Rubenesque.)  Are they protecting us from kiddie porn because of the cherubs?  I don’t know.


All of these things show the dangers of not teaching kids any art or regular history in schools.  It leaves them literally not knowing how to look at art.  Considering all the gangsta rap and pop culture pukery they’ve been exposed to, it’s strange to see these Facebook people engaged in Victorian prudery, comparable to covering the legs on pianos to keep the delicate sensitivities of the ladies intact.


The other thing is, art has become degraded since the days of Rubens and a heck of a lot of other artists after him.  As Germaine Greer noted (and I paraphrase), sure, she’s praised the rubbishy avant-garde art of the day, but is that all there is now?


To equate Rubens to porn because of nude figures is probably less Victorian prudery than something even grosser: a dead bureaucratic mindset that suggests minds unable to engage in critical thinking.  They just check boxes.  They just train to the test.




“The Judgment of Paris” by Peter Paul Rubens.


Now, maybe I am just being critical of something that isn’t happening.  Maybe there is so much content for Facebook to monitor that machines did this, not ignorant Millennials still rapping to the latest Rihanna video.  If so, it’s faulty programming, or programming that remains so underdeveloped that it cannot distinguish.


If that’s the case, then it shows that content is un-monitorable, and maybe Facebook ought to get out of that business altogether, ending censorship on the grounds that it’s more like the phone company than an edited content platform.  It certainly would make life better for conservatives, who are censored by Facebook all the time.


Would Facebook’s recognition of this reality really be worth not censoring conservatives as part of the bargain?  Or are the people running the company more comfortable being philistines?  Let’s see how this plays out.


Are the leftists running Facebook really that stupid?


According to the Flanders tourist authority, they’re censoring images from Rubens paintings, unable to distinguish art from pornography.


Someone told them “nude, bad,” and not a one of them had sufficient art education to know that these painting represent the pinnacle of Western cultural achievement.


The Brussels tourism officials sent in their protest, via Brussels Times and Belgian news site VRT:



These Rubens works being censored are amazing – artworks so important that they remain studied today, and in the most cutting-edge places.


I was educated in fine art at Santa Monica College, probably the best community college in the country for this, and you bet we studied Rubens.  My professors, who were noted artists in their own right, such as Marc Trujillo, insisted that we go to the Getty Museum and copy Rubens (and other masters) in our art notebooks.  You want to learn to draw?  Your job to start is to go copy Rubens – from the actual drawing or painting itself – and figure out what he was doing, learning every nuance, and doing it over and over to get it down.  Because virtually nobody could draw better than Rubens.  And man, oh, man, do you learn to respect!  Try it!  That’s what art students really do.  Heck, it’s what Velázquez and Delacroix really did.  They all do it.




“Bacchus” by Peter Paul Rubens.


So it really disgusts me to hear that the culturally illiterate weasels over at Facebook, bred on a diet of comics, videogames, and Britney Spears pop videos, are making a hash of things by imagining that the Rubens images of the human body, the nude figures, in the masterpieces worth hundreds of millions on the market, are somehow obscene.  Is it a matter of fat-shaming?  (Rubens’s women are completely Rubenesque.)  Are they protecting us from kiddie porn because of the cherubs?  I don’t know.


All of these things show the dangers of not teaching kids any art or regular history in schools.  It leaves them literally not knowing how to look at art.  Considering all the gangsta rap and pop culture pukery they’ve been exposed to, it’s strange to see these Facebook people engaged in Victorian prudery, comparable to covering the legs on pianos to keep the delicate sensitivities of the ladies intact.


The other thing is, art has become degraded since the days of Rubens and a heck of a lot of other artists after him.  As Germaine Greer noted (and I paraphrase), sure, she’s praised the rubbishy avant-garde art of the day, but is that all there is now?


To equate Rubens to porn because of nude figures is probably less Victorian prudery than something even grosser: a dead bureaucratic mindset that suggests minds unable to engage in critical thinking.  They just check boxes.  They just train to the test.




“The Judgment of Paris” by Peter Paul Rubens.


Now, maybe I am just being critical of something that isn’t happening.  Maybe there is so much content for Facebook to monitor that machines did this, not ignorant Millennials still rapping to the latest Rihanna video.  If so, it’s faulty programming, or programming that remains so underdeveloped that it cannot distinguish.


If that’s the case, then it shows that content is un-monitorable, and maybe Facebook ought to get out of that business altogether, ending censorship on the grounds that it’s more like the phone company than an edited content platform.  It certainly would make life better for conservatives, who are censored by Facebook all the time.


Would Facebook’s recognition of this reality really be worth not censoring conservatives as part of the bargain?  Or are the people running the company more comfortable being philistines?  Let’s see how this plays out.




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/