Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by AlanMexicali

  1. "Look ridiculous". How about IS ridiculous. I might add very distorted thinking and repeats the same false accusations about 25 times - this is abnormal behavior (behaviour.) IMO
  2. Psychological projection at it's ultimate climax. You are describing yourself and why you spew right wing propaganda.
  3. Don't ignore the fact that his side is spewing propaganda (some of it which is harmful to others and malicious lies) and he supports it here to feel powerful. Pathetic but entertaining at least.
  4. Your psychological projection is outstanding and very accurate.
  5. Will you ever post anything related to Covid-19 that is actually true? https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2021/11/04/feds-pay-zero-claims-for-covid-19-vaccine-injuriesdeaths/?sh=4948b094a879 "Feds Pay Zero Claims For Covid-19 Vaccine Injuries/Deaths Adam Andrzejewski Former Contributor Nov 4, 2021,04:11pm EDT In fiscal year 2021, the U.S. government paid $246.9 million in claims for vaccine-related injuries and deaths. Not a single payout was related to Covid-19 vaccines. Each person with a “provable” injury from a Covid vaccine could claim up to $379,000 from a special Covid vaccine fund set up by the federal government. The payout for death could be as high as $370,376. However, according to an OpenTheBooks.com investigation, the federal government didn’t pay a penny for Covid-vaccine claims. The special fund for these claims is called the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP)."
  6. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/may/04/tiktok-posts/no-red-cross-isnt-warning-vaccinated-people-not-do/ If you get the COVID-19 vaccine, you can't donate blood or plasma "because it's completely tainted." False.
  7. The "scorced earth policy" you mentioned is simply a US Military magazine article SUGGESTING Taiwan do that if invaded by China. Taiwan never said they plan to do it as you say - that they are set up to do it. Dumb stuff at any rate. https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/taiwan-should-adopt-a-broken-nest-policy-and-destroy-tsmc-in-wake-of-any-chinese-invasion-suggests-us-military-paper/
  8. https://news.google.com/articles/CAIiEO_-8MONxlbMbFXYkoCVuPMqFwgEKg4IACoGCAowl6p7MN-zCTDZ4PsF?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen "Because of the protection offered by vaccines and recovery from previous cases, the hospitalization rate and death toll of this surge is lower than previous waves so far. But “we’re not at a place where we can confidently say that each of these new variant surges is not going to result in a surge of deaths”, Nash said. Hospitalization and death are also not the only negative outcomes of cases. “The long Covid threat is going to be something that’s with us for a while, even after hospitalizations and deaths become less of an issue,” Nash said. Long Covid can occur in an estimated 10 to 30% of cases, and each infection – and reinfection – seems to be “a roll of the dice” for developing long-term health issues, he said. “It's very poorly understood, in my view, given how important a public health issue it could be. But it is absolutely high on the list of reasons to avoid Covid infection right now. It's tragic that this is not something that is discussed as a reason to prevent the impact of a surge." Vaccines protect against long Covid by about 15%, new research suggestions, underscoring the need for other precautions to prevent infections. “This idea that we need to return to normal and that’s the most important thing, rather than just actually using mitigation measures to save lives – it’s actually not that hard, and if it were normalized, we could do it,” Jirmanus said. “To just decide that it’s perfectly fine for everyone to be infected three to four times a year in the future with a new virus whose effects we don’t fully understand is a huge, huge gamble,” she continued. "We just don't know what Covid could lead to in the future... We're playing with fire." "
  9. "How to get your proof of tax situation without e-signature in 15 minutes? Here we tell you If you, like many people, are desperate to obtain your certificate but do not have time to go to train, keep reading, you will thank us MAGNOLIA JOCELYN PACHECO RAMÍREZ | 9:44 a.m. listen to this article show playlist 1x 1:42  Subscribe to our newsletter Receive the latest news and always stay informed Email Send As we tell you in this note, in recent days huge queues have been registered very early in the different offices of the Tax Administration Service (SAT). The reason? Proof of tax situation What is the proof of tax situation and what is it for? ADVERTISING The proof of tax situation is a record that allows knowing the status of taxpayers before the SAT. It is a reference on the legality of the taxpayer's tax situation and can be used to find out the tax regime to which the taxpayer belongs, know their economic activity and serve as an identity before government authorities. If you, like many people, are desperate to obtain your certificate but do not have time to go to train, keep reading, you will thank us. How to get the certificate without e-signature? The simplest thing is to enter the SAT page, select 'execute online' and generate the certificate, however, this option asks for E-SIGNATURE. If you don't have it, calm down, don't panic, there is a very simple way to get it that will prevent you from going to the SAT offices for long hours of training. You only need to call 5562722728 (SAT) wait a few minutes on the line and when an operator answers, ask him to generate your tax certificate. The operator will ask for your RFC, an email -to which he will send it- and a telephone number. And in just 15 minutes your statement will have arrived in your email in PDF and you can easily attach it to your bank or send it to your accountant.  Save yourself those annoying lines, pass this note to your roommate, your best friend and even your relatives." https://www.excelsior.com.mx/trending/como-sacar-tu-constancia-de-situacion-fiscal-sin-e-firma-en-15-minutos-aqui-te-decimos
  10. Recently the CFE took the "escrituras" as proof of ownership of the property with the addresses of 5 sales of 3 friends of mine as soon as the money was transfered to the 5 owners without the registered "escrituras" which took a year for the Notario to get. No need to wait to change the name on the CFE bill.
  11. Reality is not spewing propaganda/lies. That is what all fascists do. This guy's reality is not even close to real. It is fantasy where he "thinks" he is spewing the truth. He isn't. They are lies and so many of them it smells up the place.
  12. It is called a retraction. FYI "re·trac·tion /rəˈtrakSH(ə)n/ Learn to pronounce noun 1. the action of drawing something back or back in. "prey are grasped between the jaws upon tongue retraction" 2. a withdrawal of a statement, accusation, or undertaking. "he issued a retraction of his allegations" " When can we expect to see a long list of them from you?
  13. https://www.google.com.mx/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/09/30/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-misinformation.amp.htmlThe Coronavirus Pandemic "Study Finds ‘Single Largest Driver’ of Coronavirus Misinformation: Trump Cornell University researchers analyzing 38 million English-language articles about the pandemic found that President Trump was the largest driver of the “infodemic.” Share on Facebook Share on WhatsApp Post on Twitter Mail Image Mentions of President Trump made up nearly 38 percent of the overall online “misinformation conversation” about the virus, researchers said.Credit...Erin Schaff/The New York Times By Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Noah Weiland Published Sept. 30, 2020Updated Oct. 6, 2021 "WASHINGTON — Of the flood of misinformation, conspiracy theories and falsehoods seeding the internet on the coronavirus, one common thread stands out: President Trump. That is the conclusion of researchers at Cornell University who analyzed 38 million articles about the pandemic in English-language media around the world. Mentions of Mr. Trump made up nearly 38 percent of the overall “misinformation conversation,” making the president the largest driver of the “infodemic” — falsehoods involving the pandemic. The study, to be released Thursday, is the first comprehensive examination of coronavirus misinformation in traditional and online media. “The biggest surprise was that the president of the United States was the single largest driver of misinformation around Covid,” said Sarah Evanega, the director of the Cornell Alliance for Science and the study’s lead author. “That’s concerning in that there are real-world dire health implications.” ADVERTISEMENT The study identified 11 topics of misinformation, including various conspiracy theories, like one that emerged in January suggesting the pandemic was manufactured by Democrats to coincide with Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, and another that purported to trace the initial outbreak in Wuhan, China, to people who ate bat soup. But by far the most prevalent topic of misinformation was “miracle cures,” including Mr. Trump’s promotion of anti-malarial drugs and disinfectants as potential treatments for Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. That accounted for more misinformation than the other 10 topics combined, the researchers reported. They found that of the more than 38 million articles published from Jan. 1 to May 26, more than 1.1 million — or slightly less than 3 percent — contained misinformation. They sought to identify and categorize falsehoods, and also tracked trends in reporting, including rises in coverage. For example, on April 24, a day after Mr. Trump floated — and was ridiculed for — the idea that disinfectants and ultraviolet light might treat Covid-19, there were more than 30,000 articles in the “miracle cures” category, up from fewer than 10,000 only days earlier. Mr. Trump drove those increases, the study found. ADVERTISEMENT To those who have been watching Mr. Trump’s statements, the idea that he is responsible for spreading or amplifying misinformation might not come as a huge shock. The president has also been feeding disinformation campaigns around the presidential election and mail-in voting that Russian actors have amplified — and his own government has tried to stop. But in interviews, the Cornell researchers said they expected to find more mentions of conspiracy theories, and not so many articles involving Mr. Trump."
  14. Just the news: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Solomon_(political_commentator) Conspiracy theories are all you have got it appears? https://www.mediamatters.org/john-solomon Searching out these far right sources gives confirmation of your mindset where you state you use facts and rational thinking when arguing on these topics. I presume you do not but "think" you do.
  15. You're the liar here, obviously! Typical of a conspiracy theorist. "Did Obamacare Make Premiums Go Up? By DANIEL KURT Updated June 12, 2021 Reviewed by ANDY SMITH Fact checked by SKYLAR CLARINE It’s hard to find a federal law that has polarized the American public as much as the Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as Obamacare. Proponents argue that the bill is doing precisely what it promised to do: holding down the rate of spending on medical services. Earlier on, after the ACA was implemented, many opponents of the law on the political right fumed over sky-high premiums. Which side was closer to the truth? Here's a look at the earlier years of premium prices and how Marketplace premiums look in 2021. A Shakeup in the Market for Individual Plans While the ACA created new regulations for employer-based health plans, undoubtedly its biggest impact is on policies bought outside the workplace. The law fundamentally reshaped the market for these individual plans, on which more than 33 million Americans rely for their health coverage.1 First, the ACA created online exchanges where consumers could, for the first time, shop for comparable plans with relative ease.2 In addition, the law established a mandate to purchase health insurance, theoretically bringing more healthy young people into the market and putting downward pressure on healthcare costs.3 The bill also included a number of provisions aimed at bolstering the quality of individual plans. For example, insurers were required to cover policyholders with pre-existing medical conditions and to provide certain “essential benefits,” such as maternity and mental health coverage.4 In theory, these components of the ACA could have pushed premiums higher. In light of these new requirements for insurers, healthcare experts say looking at prices before and after 2014, the year healthcare exchanges were introduced, is a tricky endeavor because the policies are so different. In many cases, the policies that Americans are buying today offer greater benefits—including a cap on out-of-pocket expenses—than those purchased prior to the ACA. Expectations for the Affordable Care Act (ACA) With that caveat in mind, The New York Times assessed pricing data and predicted that premiums would rise by 8.4% for the most popular health plans that consumers carried over from 2013. However, the Times also predicted that premiums would rise by only 1% if consumers switched plans and shopped on the exchanges.5 When you factor in the subsidies that lower-income earners receive, there’s actually some evidence that personal healthcare outlays may have gone down slightly in 2014. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation examined premiums for those who switched from earlier plans to ACA-compliant policies and found that 46% paid lower premiums. Conversely, 39% said their premiums were higher.6 The Early Effect on Premiums For 2015, the second year of the online exchanges, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that price increases were fairly small. Nationwide, premiums for exchange-based plans with a medium level of coverage rose by a modest 2%—and that’s without tallying the effect of subsidies that reduce out-of-pocket expense for some individuals and families. (The study examined the second-lowest-cost silver plan in the marketplace; plans are divided into bronze, silver, gold, and platinum levels).7 A separate source, the McKinsey Center for the U.S. Health System Reform, revealed a somewhat larger jump from 2014 to 2015. It concluded that gross premiums (those before subsidies) climbed by an average of 6% for the least-expensive plans on the exchange.8 While a 6% uptick may sound significant, it was not too drastic when compared to pricing trends before the healthcare law. The Commonwealth Fund, another nonpartisan research organization, studied the three-year period before the passage of the ACA—from 2008 to 2010—and found that premiums on the individual market were rising by 10% or more per year nationwide.9 More Recent Effects on Premiums In 2018 and 2019, the ACA's marketplaces experienced considerable turmoil that resulted in huge swings in premiums. In October 2017, the administration stopped directly reimbursing insurers for cost-sharing reductions. The ACA required marketplace insurers to reduce out-of-pocket costs for people with incomes below 250% of the federal poverty level, so insurers increased their premiums (typically silver marketplace premiums ) to cover the additional cost. There were also concerns about the marketplaces’ stability and long-term viability, and these fears were reflected in the 2018 premiums.10 In 2018, the lowest silver marketplace premium offered in each rating region increased sharply by 29.7% on average. Twenty-eight states increased their average lowest silver premium by more than 29%.10 In 2019, many insurers realized that they had overreacted, and increases for the lowest silver premiums averaged -0.4% nationwide, and, in many states, premiums decreased. In 2020, continued stability caused premiums to fall across all states by an average of 3.5%. According to the Urban Institute, 31 states had lower premiums in 2020 than in 2019.10 ACA Prices Remain Steady in 2021 In 2021, ACA Marketplace premiums stabilized, according to the Urban Institute. The national average benchmark premium fell again in 2021, following decreases in both 2019 and 2020—remarkable because it contrasts with premium increases in the employer-sponsored insurance market over the same period. Note that the nationwide average belies variation in premiums across and within states. The Urban Institute found that insurer participation is key to setting premium levels and influencing growth over time. The ACA made premium tax credits available to people purchasing health coverage on the marketplaces but only when their incomes fell between 100% and 400% of the federal poverty level. Millions of uninsured people are eligible for subsidized coverage on the ACA marketplaces but do not take advantage of this financial help. This may be that the financial help is not sufficient to make the premium or the deductible affordable. Moreover, a sharp cliff exists at 400% of the poverty level. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 law passed in March 2021 under President Biden expanded marketplace subsidies above 400% of poverty and increased subsidies for those making between 100% and 400% of the poverty level. According to Kaiser Family Foundation, "These additional subsidies will yield substantially lower premium payments for the vast majority of the nearly 15 million uninsured people who are eligible to buy on the marketplace and the nearly 14 million people insured on the individual market." " https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/071415/did-obamacare-make-premiums-go.asp
  16. You are quite the comedian. She argued, debated and debunked every conspiracy theory you spewed and here you state you won all these arguments wIth her when you lost every one. You insult people and groups of people and cry when they give the same treatment to you as if you somehow didn't deserve/ask for it in the first place. Most critizism on this thread and others are accurately describing your behaviour. Maybe some self awareness might seep into your life and help unblock what you presently precieve as reality. It is fantasy we all are witnessing and telling you, which is far away from reality.
  17. You try to silence us who speak the truth and debunk conspiracy theories. Insults don't work on either side. We have a vested interest in debunking all the lies because they are dangerous, obviously.
  18. You assume quite a lot. Many people here could buy and sell you and as a matter of privacy on a public forum do not need or want to brag about their life's achievements like you, a newbie, appear to like to do to "try" to impress others. I don't care you or your wife were in the military and to me it is no big deal that you seem to think it is and now feel entitled because you were.
  • Create New...