Jill Livingstone 
Member since May 31, 2014

Latest Review

Re: “Affordable Care Act Enrollment Assistance

No date? No times available? More information would help.

Posted by Jill Livingstone on 04/13/2016 at 12:37 PM

Recent Comments

Re: “Editor's Note: The urge to unmerge and what it really means

The city and country agreed to fund a study. The study was performed and now the divas in the county want to argue about it. Were they asked to provide input? Did they? I want to know if the study was based on real numbers, and if the county was not given an opportunity to discuss their proven data with Berkshire then why not? Garbage in, garbage out. OR -- they're just fighting because they don't like the way everything shook out. I want to know who's lying here.

If all kicklighter is squealing about is whether he will be in charge or not -- same for Scott -- then they are risking lives out here.

Why at a time when cooperation to solve a problem should be de rigueur they've decided that a divorce is better? Sounds like rank amateurism. If they can't think of the voters, at least try to remember their own families. That's the least they can do, or have they already made deals with police and fire to save themselves first and to H__ with everyone else?

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jill Livingstone on 07/27/2017 at 12:42 PM

Re: “A Short Field Guide to Sustainable Resistance

Affordable healthcare is going the way of the doo-do0 bird. The fact that trump supporters are unable to see it coming or unwilling to admit it, is simply normalizing what isn't normal or democratic. Democrats have been studying the Ryan plan since he first penned it; we've listened to the HHS nominee and read what he's written; we understand what the republicans have been saying for years about healthcare and it's perfectly reasonable for people to claim that the affordability factor is going out of the window. And there's a simple reason why. The plan doesn't work if it's not mandated. Young people don't buy insurance they feel they don't need. And when they drop out the (affordable) MATH just isn't there. You can't keep healthcare affordable if the young who use far fewer services aren't in the pool with the very sick people who need much more care. Premiums will have to go up unless the republicans imagine that insurance companies will just pick up the tab!!

Cutting across state lines does absolutely nothing for affordability. First of all, they have that option now in many cases so long as they follow the ACA guidelines and most insurance companies don't do it. If insurance is taken out of the hands of our state commissioners, it's clear that the insurance companies will all be headquartered in the state with the fewest regulations. And that leads to a crisis in coverage. Back to the good old days when the insurance company decided whether they would cover your treatments or not with profits as their only motivation.

Somehow republicans have decided that we can't look at FACTS and come to some conclusions. All of a sudden, the way in which things will go becomes very foggy to them even when logic is the issue and not some silly notion of fear-mongering.

This isn't about tea leaves here -- it's about what actually works financially.

Here's another one that's just obvious on the face! Which is better. to introduce a one billion jobs plan when the unemployment rate is 10% and the interest rate is 0% or introduce it when the unemployment rate is 5% and the interest rate is 2%? When Obama introduced a jobs plan it was a no go -- even though 10% was only counting people still in the market and looking for jobs. But now that Trump is in and unemployment is at a 35 year low and interest rates are rising, he wants to borrow the money to improve our infrastructure. Where are the workers? Who's going to pay the debt? We know we're not raising taxes on corporations -- even though they are the users whose big trucks are flying down the roadways!!

And yet the republicans are trying to convince us that the latter is so much better. Even a 4th grader could get that one right if they weren't so preoccupied with believing that someone wants to derail their favorite racist, xenophobic misogynist.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jill Livingstone on 02/07/2017 at 12:47 PM

Re: “Editor's Note: Savannah's continuing double standard on small businesses

I believe Mr. Schmitt should go into court with the idea that the Council pulled a scam. He presented a plan for his business, Council agreed to a plan, Schmitt put his life savings into the plan, and now Council is stalling on the liquor license claiming that Schmitt didn't do his "due diligence." The Council scammed Schmitt out of his savings on the come, likely knowing that they could convince the residents that small business is a good idea or small business is a bad idea depending on some standard about which we can only guess. If Schmitt doesn't get the license, the city should refund ALL of his investment in the space IF he wants to get out. And of course like other Council/Mayoral mistakes, the city will have to pay once again for their incompetence.

(Speaking of that, did the Council ever remove the possibility that a government worker/official will be paid a full pension even when the Courts find said official guilty of crimes??) Did the City refund the Children's Fund of the Sugar Factory after they permitted a government employee to embezzle the funds -- yes permitted. No oversight = permission to thieves. Is she collecting her pension??

Posted by Jill Livingstone on 02/07/2017 at 12:27 PM

Re: “Municipal broadband: An opposing view

Phillip: Hope you read Lebos' article and will come back with a response. This is fascinating information and I would greatly appreciate any input you have - especially about the new technology that will supersede a fiber optic network.

I'm not one of those people who believes that government can't do anything right (Medicare, SS, clean water, clean air) and I'm still interested to know if the government can do it better, cheaper, faster than private industry. AND I'd like to warn all of us that net neutrality will be a thing of the past in very short order (I predict less than a year). How much is THAT worth to customers of a government owned grid?

When people vote for "freedom" it means we are free to pay private enterprise twice what we pay the government for the same service. And the employees, the American employees, who take those jobs that used to be government jobs will be underpaid, overworked and no benefits. But they'll have the title of "manager."

Posted by Jill Livingstone on 01/13/2017 at 10:33 AM

Re: “Editor's Note: Budget battle is only just beginning

>>"1) Help City officials avoid looking at actual potentially wasteful expenses that could be cut instead, such as the $3 million Fairgrounds purchase."

Cutting arts is so much easier than looking at Council mistakes. I'm sitting here wondering why a man who had nothing to do with the Cutter mistake, with the Lovitt mistake is NOT biting the bullet with the Fairgrounds mistake?? They need a new meeting to figure out that the cuts should come from something we don't need, not programs we obviously need.

Mistakes have been made (President Street property investment that turned to "dirt" for the city; the developer had zero skin in the game! What kind of deal is that?). Maybe they'll drop buying property (Coffee Bluff Marina as one example of failure) for a while, and begin to make sure that our contracts with employees aren't for life even when they wind up being incompetent or jail bait.

I think every head of agency should be looking for money instead of a sweeping and relatively simple cut across the board. And look for the kinds of mistakes that won't have us accusing this administration down the road of crooked and stupid stuff that's happened in the past.

We don't need the fairgrounds. We could put in a few bucks to help find an appropriate buyer, but that should be "It". Surely there's some developer around who is willing to use federal money to build a low cost, integrated housing community for the poor and homeless. The feds have for years made some very lucrative deals for people willing to work to make money instead of inheriting it from the local government.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jill Livingstone on 12/13/2016 at 3:08 PM

Re: “Editor's Note: Will the media own up, or double down?

For what it's worth, Hillary has won the popular vote by over 2 million and still counting. It's not as if we ran the wrong person! How do we know what skeletons they would have found in Bernie's closet (his wife's financial problems for example?) Hillary simply didn't win in the states that counted in the EC. One person - one vote and she would be the president. When a state with a total population of roughly 300,000 registered voters has 3 EC reps (WY), and another state with roughly 600,000 registered voters also has 3 EC reps (DC), it's very clear that the rural states have twice the clout. In New York, most districts (1 vote) have 707,000 registered voters.

Rather than hang our heads and declare we had a loser for a candidate, we ought to be looking at the long game -- gerrymandering, Voter Suppression, demands for ID to solve no problem -- there is a minuscule amount of in person illegal voting and most of that is by mistake, but plenty of Americans white and black, rural, poor and students are being kept from the polls. Strange how many of them are likely democratic voters.

And yes, Hillary did win the debates by any objective standards. But I do agree that the MSM did not help the voters. They lead with blood, invective, insults, misogyny, racism and xenophobia and never covered any of the issues that presumably are important to most Americans. Pew tells us that we are more alike than different, MSM focuses on how different we are, because covering the issues would mean homework, knowledge about the issues, and cutting down on their own income. Donald made a lot of money for every network and they weren't about to hurt the cash heifer.

Donald's drama caused people to look -- he kept their eyes off of the important stuff and on the issues that divide us. The identity politics (if that's what you call it) came from both sides. You've fallen into a republican meme if you mean that democrats are protective of blacks, whites, browns, Muslims, Mexicans and women. Donald found his base among poor white people and he kept his focus on them the entire time playing on their fears, and prejudices and loss of status in a changing world that he never outlined to them. Never, not once told them the truth. Coal is not coming back, and neither is steel. Make American Great Again? When were we not great? No trade deals? Really? I don't think so. He's not that stupid. It would cost us 18,000 jobs and spiraling inflation with Mexico, alone. And Canada? It would be impossible. I just hope he doesn't walk away from TPP. It would cost us free trade with 11 countries. They will join with China if we don't sign that agreement. I could go on but I'd be competing with you for column space. I liked what you wrote (except for the liberal hand-wringing).

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Jill Livingstone on 11/24/2016 at 5:57 PM

Re: “Editor's Note: Amendment One, ESPLOST, & the education status quo

Referendum #3 deserves your NO vote. We have a constitutional NON-partisan Commission that works for all citizens to make sure that the judges in our state are great (and the vast majority of them ARE). But there have been a few who just weren't so great, and the Commission has been our watch-dog to make sure they are investigated. Now the legislature wants to take over the Commission and appoint it's own people. (The prime mover on this bill was once a judge who resigned and swore to the Commission he would never be a judge again. Listen to see why!) Well, he's reneged. Now he wants to Judge ALL the Judges.

They are asking your permission (vote) to turn this commission upside down and to put decisions about individual judges into the hands of the legislature rather than a non-partisan commission. And it's our job to make sure that the judiciary is never subject to the legislature. They must remain independent or we run the risk that every judge will be deemed "fit" if they have the right friends.

I don't know if you caught a radio program about this referendum, it was re-run last night (10/26) on GPB at 7:00 p.m. You can now listen to it on-line. You'll hear the back story from BOTH sides and learn how this particular constitutional amendment made it to our ballot. The program features four segments but you can choose "Judges with Grudges" (the only one about this story) if you don't have a full hour to devote. It's worth you time and attention.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-arch… Click on
"Judges With Grudges".

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Jill Livingstone on 10/27/2016 at 9:03 AM

All Comments »

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Connect Savannah First Look Newsletter (Wednesday) - A weekly run down of local stories and events.

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

Copyright © 2018, Connect Savannah. All Rights Reserved.
Website powered by Foundation