Look at Cali. The leftards that run that state claim to care about the little folk that they tax and regulate the sh*t out of. Price of gas and electricity are just the tip of the iceberg.
Trump is president, and now owns the border invasion. Not accomplishing anything in regard to immigration in his first two years when his party was in control of both Houses was incompetent. Continuing to NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT when he has the power to shut immigration down TODAY as president, is treason.
Trump is quickly becoming America's Angela Merkel.
Now this was a bold take I wasn't expecting from you. Kudos on the consistency though.
Enthusiasm was the key in 16. You can pretend Biden has the Democrats fired up and be disappointed again
If this were a Democrat tonight the entire MSM would be doing a full Hannity and actually have a reason too
Somehow you have to translate the passion for the crazy kids to an adult over 35 who can actually take office
That was Bernie but the DNC doesn't want him
Do you think if Bernie had won the nomination in ‘16 he would have beaten Trump?
Sadly, yes. Entirely possible. Bernie spoke to the forgotten % of the Dem base: labor. Of course, he would have taxed them into oblivion, but he wasn't spending his time on gender-neutral bathrooms like Hillary was.
I am convinced more today than in 2016 that she lost the election because of that single lapse in judgment on the campaign trail. She forgot who she works for.
No. No she didn't.
The poor huddled masses saw right through her bullshit and elected Trump.
How is the current DNC different than last time? They aren't.
Save one lone exception they won't nominate.
My prediction is more Russian collusion in 2020 from the tone-deaf DNC.
Yes, she did. She forgot labor, and it cost her, because more people care about jobs and the economy than they do about fringe social issues. The Democratic party is as splintered as the Republican party. The only difference, as I said earlier, is that the Republicans deal with their internal splits better at election time. The Ds are a fucking shit show when the whistle blows.
Enthusiasm was the key in 16. You can pretend Biden has the Democrats fired up and be disappointed again
If this were a Democrat tonight the entire MSM would be doing a full Hannity and actually have a reason too
Somehow you have to translate the passion for the crazy kids to an adult over 35 who can actually take office
That was Bernie but the DNC doesn't want him
Do you think if Bernie had won the nomination in ‘16 he would have beaten Trump?
Sadly, yes. Entirely possible. Bernie spoke to the forgotten % of the Dem base: labor. Of course, he would have taxed them into oblivion, but he wasn't spending his time on gender-neutral bathrooms like Hillary was.
I am convinced more today than in 2016 that she lost the election because of that single lapse in judgment on the campaign trail. She forgot who she works for.
I won't pretend to be in tuned with Bernie's 2016 platform, but where would he have increased taxes for working class whites? Honest question since my perception of him has always been that he proposes increased taxes almost entirely targeted towards the wealthy.
I don't have a scientific answer for you. It's a good question. In his rhetoric, sure he's going to have Bezos and Gates and hedge fund managers pay for everything. In reality, universal (quality) healthcare, free college, free this and free that require much more than what you'd get if you liquidated the assets of all of the very rich.
Although, had he won, he would never have gotten 1/2 of that shit through Congress, so there's that.
Health care will become the issue. Get out ahead of it now if you want to win.
What even is the GOP plan for healthcare? If they repeal Obamacare any further they know they're eating the loss. So now what?
Nobody has a plan. It's a tuff issue.
The defaults are (1) it's fine as it is and (2) free for everyone!
I always favored the original Obamacare. The preexisting conditions clause was always a key need and the individual mandate was theoretically a crafty tool to keep exchanges solvent and not overrun with a bunch of lemons.
But the labrotary of democracy spoke, and despite the mandate Obamacare ultimately wasn't sufficient to keep exchanges profitable on a large scale. What worked in theory failed in practice.
Which leaves us with what? Let Obamacare continue to rot and return to the pre-2010 disaster that was our healthcare system? Shoot for the moon and implement a costly universal coverage system that simultaneously fucks over people who actually have good healthcare plans? Enticing choices.
The smart money is on both parties accomplishing nothing and continuing to play this game of roulette where they both hope the system fails its hardest when the other party is in power.
Health care will become the issue. Get out ahead of it now if you want to win.
What even is the GOP plan for healthcare? If they repeal Obamacare any further they know they're eating the loss. So now what?
Nobody has a plan. It's a tuff issue.
The defaults are (1) it's fine as it is and (2) free for everyone!
I always favored the original Obamacare. The preexisting conditions clause was always a key need and the individual mandate was theoretically a crafty tool to keep exchanges solvent and not overrun with a bunch of lemons.
But the labrotary of democracy spoke, and despite the mandate Obamacare ultimately wasn't sufficient to keep exchanges profitable on a large scale. What worked in theory failed in practice.
Which leaves us with what? Let Obamacare continue to rot and return to the pre-2010 disaster that was our healthcare system? Shoot for the moon and implement a costly universal coverage system that simultaneously fucks over people who actually have good healthcare plans? Enticing choices.
The smart money is on both parties accomplishing nothing and continuing to play this game of roulette where they both hope the system fails its hardest when the other party is in power.
I don't have much to add to the debate except to offer up this list of random facts that inform my concerns:
1. I make a pretty good living on a relative comparison basis and I work for an organization with large resources; and despite that, it seems that I like my insurance less and less each year. Overall, I seem to pay more for less.
2. There is one person close to me who has a chronic, but manageable, health condition. This makes me worry about the future.
3. I know a lot of people on Medicare who would be completely fucked without it.
I'll wait for @UW_Doog_Bot and @YellowSnow and others who are better at the economis than I to weigh in seriously b4 I shit my pants about it here. All I know is that there is always going to be a % of the population for whom society has to do everything, and another % for whom society has to subsidize a lot, and whole boat load of people who do their part and mean well but will still fall short on this one.
I don't want to wait 8 mos. to get a cancer scan, I don't want to not be able to afford to take care of myself and I don't want the US to become a place where I can't get the most advanced treatment if it makes sense. But I'd also like to be able to do it w/o having to liquidate all my assets.
I'm willing to put it all on the table and work through it from a political standpoint. Is tort reform the real answer? If so, let's talk about it. Is some kind of government oversight of the medical and pharma industry the best move? Bring it on. The issue I have is that I never hear any good idea sincerely put forth by anyone.
I just know that dismissing things out of hand based on economic and political philosophy and related conjecture by a bunch of amateurs hasn't gotten us anywhere (which is why I hold my tongue on this shit moar now, because I know I'm out of my element). There are a few immutable truths that have to be harmonized somehow: (1) it's frickin' hard to become a doc, let alone a good one, and you want that; (2) those guys didn't sign up to drive Corollas and Civics; (3) delivery of advanced medical treatment is capital fucking intensive and risky; and (4) everyone is going to need it eventually.
Do we cut back on other big public shit to pay for it? Does the military need to be the % of the budget it is now? I don't have anything against the military, but it's a hungry beast. Will true welfare reform free up enough public funds to help the issue?
Disagree, but also who gives a shit. It's like arguing Ty vs. Gilby. Both models saw high healthcare spending and outcomes that couldn't keep pace with the rest of the world. They're both failures.
Health care will become the issue. Get out ahead of it now if you want to win.
What even is the GOP plan for healthcare? If they repeal Obamacare any further they know they're eating the loss. So now what?
Nobody has a plan. It's a tuff issue.
The defaults are (1) it's fine as it is and (2) free for everyone!
I always favored the original Obamacare. The preexisting conditions clause was always a key need and the individual mandate was theoretically a crafty tool to keep exchanges solvent and not overrun with a bunch of lemons.
But the labrotary of democracy spoke, and despite the mandate Obamacare ultimately wasn't sufficient to keep exchanges profitable on a large scale. What worked in theory failed in practice.
Which leaves us with what? Let Obamacare continue to rot and return to the pre-2010 disaster that was our healthcare system? Shoot for the moon and implement a costly universal coverage system that simultaneously fucks over people who actually have good healthcare plans? Enticing choices.
The smart money is on both parties accomplishing nothing and continuing to play this game of roulette where they both hope the system fails its hardest when the other party is in power.
I don't have much to add to the debate except to offer up this list of random facts that inform my concerns:
1. I make a pretty good living on a relative comparison basis and I work for an organization with large resources; and despite that, it seems that I like my insurance less and less each year. Overall, I seem to pay more for less.
2. There is one person close to me who has a chronic, but manageable, health condition. This makes me worry about the future.
3. I know a lot of people on Medicare who would be completely fucked without it.
I'll wait for @UW_Doog_Bot and @YellowSnow and others who are better at the economis than I to weigh in seriously b4 I shit my pants about it here. All I know is that there is always going to be a % of the population for whom society has to do everything, and another % for whom society has to subsidize a lot, and whole boat load of people who do their part and mean well but will still fall short on this one.
I don't want to wait 8 mos. to get a cancer scan, I don't want to not be able to afford to take care of myself and I don't want the US to become a place where I can't get the most advanced treatment if it makes sense. But I'd also like to be able to do it w/o having to liquidate all my assets.
I'm willing to put it all on the table and work through it from a political standpoint. Is tort reform the real answer? If so, let's talk about it. Is some kind of government oversight of the medical and pharma industry the best move? Bring it on. The issue I have is that I never hear any good idea sincerely put forth by anyone.
I just know that dismissing things out of hand based on economic and political philosophy and related conjecture by a bunch of amateurs hasn't gotten us anywhere (which is why I hold my tongue on this shit moar now, because I know I'm out of my element). There are a few immutable truths that have to be harmonized somehow: (1) it's frickin' hard to become a doc, let alone a good one, and you want that; (2) those guys didn't sign up to drive Corollas and Civics; (3) delivery of advanced medical treatment is capital fucking intensive and risky; and (4) everyone is going to need it eventually.
Do we cut back on other big public shit to pay for it? Does the military need to be the % of the budget it is now? I don't have anything against the military, but it's a hungry beast. Will true welfare reform free up enough public funds to help the issue?
I don't see any good options.
If I were to start a utopia from scratch today, Bernie's Medicare for all model would be my go to. It's the only way to provide for everyone when the free market has clearly fallen short for our most vulnerable.
But that's not where we are. A move to M4A in today's system would run into any of, but not limited to, the following problems:
-Providers would be under capacity and wait times would sky rocket. You can't add 30 million people to the pool and not expect painful upfront costs. -People with previously good healthcare would see worse coverage at potentially higher costs. Sucks to be them? -The government is now in charge of setting prices for Medicare to charge providers. History has a not so glowing track record of governments setting prices for essential services. Bureaucracy now has an insane amount of power with few levers of oversight. -If these prices are too high, we're overpaying for healthcare. If they're too low we're not properly compensating providers and we're disincentivizing an entire industry. Our best and brightest will no longer want to become doctors. -We're dismantling an entire insurance industry. A lucrative one at that. That's an economic hit. Portfolios plummet and job losses abound.
Anyways, I can see why this is a political no-go for the GOP. But what's the alternative? Or are we content with the status quo?
Comments
Yes, she did. She forgot labor, and it cost her, because more people care about jobs and the economy than they do about fringe social issues. The Democratic party is as splintered as the Republican party. The only difference, as I said earlier, is that the Republicans deal with their internal splits better at election time. The Ds are a fucking shit show when the whistle blows.
That right there is enough
And its always the economy.
Stupid
Although, had he won, he would never have gotten 1/2 of that shit through Congress, so there's that.
Got the dems the House back after the utter failure of the GOP to do the whole replace part of their promise
So do impeachment instead
Same as it ever was.
The defaults are (1) it's fine as it is and (2) free for everyone!
But the labrotary of democracy spoke, and despite the mandate Obamacare ultimately wasn't sufficient to keep exchanges profitable on a large scale. What worked in theory failed in practice.
Which leaves us with what? Let Obamacare continue to rot and return to the pre-2010 disaster that was our healthcare system? Shoot for the moon and implement a costly universal coverage system that simultaneously fucks over people who actually have good healthcare plans? Enticing choices.
The smart money is on both parties accomplishing nothing and continuing to play this game of roulette where they both hope the system fails its hardest when the other party is in power.
1. I make a pretty good living on a relative comparison basis and I work for an organization with large resources; and despite that, it seems that I like my insurance less and less each year. Overall, I seem to pay more for less.
2. There is one person close to me who has a chronic, but manageable, health condition. This makes me worry about the future.
3. I know a lot of people on Medicare who would be completely fucked without it.
I'll wait for @UW_Doog_Bot and @YellowSnow and others who are better at the economis than I to weigh in seriously b4 I shit my pants about it here. All I know is that there is always going to be a % of the population for whom society has to do everything, and another % for whom society has to subsidize a lot, and whole boat load of people who do their part and mean well but will still fall short on this one.
I don't want to wait 8 mos. to get a cancer scan, I don't want to not be able to afford to take care of myself and I don't want the US to become a place where I can't get the most advanced treatment if it makes sense. But I'd also like to be able to do it w/o having to liquidate all my assets.
I'm willing to put it all on the table and work through it from a political standpoint. Is tort reform the real answer? If so, let's talk about it. Is some kind of government oversight of the medical and pharma industry the best move? Bring it on. The issue I have is that I never hear any good idea sincerely put forth by anyone.
I just know that dismissing things out of hand based on economic and political philosophy and related conjecture by a bunch of amateurs hasn't gotten us anywhere (which is why I hold my tongue on this shit moar now, because I know I'm out of my element). There are a few immutable truths that have to be harmonized somehow: (1) it's frickin' hard to become a doc, let alone a good one, and you want that; (2) those guys didn't sign up to drive Corollas and Civics; (3) delivery of advanced medical treatment is capital fucking intensive and risky; and (4) everyone is going to need it eventually.
Do we cut back on other big public shit to pay for it? Does the military need to be the % of the budget it is now? I don't have anything against the military, but it's a hungry beast. Will true welfare reform free up enough public funds to help the issue?
You are 60+ years old.
Without health insurance.
No retirement plan.
Started smoking again.
I wonder how this is going to end?
MAGA!
If I were to start a utopia from scratch today, Bernie's Medicare for all model would be my go to. It's the only way to provide for everyone when the free market has clearly fallen short for our most vulnerable.
But that's not where we are. A move to M4A in today's system would run into any of, but not limited to, the following problems:
-Providers would be under capacity and wait times would sky rocket. You can't add 30 million people to the pool and not expect painful upfront costs.
-People with previously good healthcare would see worse coverage at potentially higher costs. Sucks to be them?
-The government is now in charge of setting prices for Medicare to charge providers. History has a not so glowing track record of governments setting prices for essential services. Bureaucracy now has an insane amount of power with few levers of oversight.
-If these prices are too high, we're overpaying for healthcare. If they're too low we're not properly compensating providers and we're disincentivizing an entire industry. Our best and brightest will no longer want to become doctors.
-We're dismantling an entire insurance industry. A lucrative one at that. That's an economic hit. Portfolios plummet and job losses abound.
Anyways, I can see why this is a political no-go for the GOP. But what's the alternative? Or are we content with the status quo?