Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Market politics

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't subscribe to Bannon's apocalyptic notions.

I certainly don't, either. Neither do the authors of the book, it seems to me. The way I framed my agreement with a certain "view" of history may have been confusing, since I haven't fully specified what that was. The part that I found compelling was the whole idea that history has a certain cycle that tends to repeat through that particular succession. But any direct connection between that theory and any given interpretation of current events is in the eye of the particular beholder who subscribes to that interpretation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
The momentum is swinging left of the 'Left'........or at least left of the Democrats much more centralist position than years past. In the 2016 primaries Bernie received more votes from young voters of all demographics than both Hillary and Trump combined received from the same age group. Those voters are 4 years older and there is a new, younger wave behind them for 2020. But it isn't just the young voters. And it isn't just frustrated Democrats. Republicans are shifting too. Did anyone else happen to see the crowd at the Fox Town Hall with Bernie last night go crazy in support of Medicare for All when Bret Baier asked the audience if they would really want to shift their current coverage to Medicare for All. It was a big surprise and disappointment to the Fox hosts that thought they had actually set that question up for a big disappointment for Bernie.......and yet the overwhelming majority of the people in their audience actually wanted change. Here is the short video clip of that exchange. It was a real mic drop moment:

Fox News hosts underestimate popularity of Bernie Sanders during town hall – video
 
We had zero tolerance in the 80's. Nothing new. My wife's a teacher and the biggest problem with the Millennials and following generations is that parents won't let their children be stressed, upset, challenged, not included, etc... My wife has had parents tell her that they never want to see their child struggle.

Kids today can't even deal with the simplest of emotions and if they are required to they are told they are a victim.

My wife was accused of bullying a student because she read off a list of kids that made the A honor roll. She then read off a list of kids that made the B honor roll. The parent of the kid who complained to the principal was on the B honor roll. The parent said that her daughter was in tears because she was publicly shamed for not being on the A honor roll.

I started high school in 1980 and there was some of that starting, I don't think it really got going until a bit later. Also the first Millennials started school around 1985.

There is that coddling parents now do too. My SO and I have noted there are a lot fewer kids on bikes now than when we were kids and the few who are have helmets and sometimes knee and elbow pads. We had none of that when we were kids and we knew nobody who was killed on a bicycle. I did break my wrist on a bike (chain came off and went into the spokes going downhill) and I know a classmate who was killed on a motorcycle when he was 17, but nobody was killed on a bicycle we knew. Yet there is all this paranoia about it.

There was also a story a couple of years ago where a parent was arrested for child endangerment for letting his kids walk home a few blocks from school. If they did that when I was a kid, everybody's parents would have been in prison. My mother was one of the most overprotective of all the parents I knew (she was pretty messed up mentally) and I was allowed to walk to and from school. When I got to 14 I was even allowed to walk a mile to the bus stop, and ride the bus to the mall which was about 20 miles away. And we lived on the border of East LA, a pretty rough part of Los Angeles. And I stood out as one of the few white kids around.

I certainly don't, either. Neither do the authors of the book, it seems to me. The way I framed my agreement with a certain "view" of history may have been confusing, since I haven't fully specified what that was. The part that I found compelling was the whole idea that history has a certain cycle that tends to repeat through that particular succession. But any direct connection between that theory and any given interpretation of current events is in the eye of the particular beholder who subscribes to that interpretation.

Yup. The author is pretty reasonable from what I remember. He speculated loosely on what the future might hold, but his purpose was more focused on reporting the history than what might happen.

The momentum is swinging left of the 'Left'........or at least left of the Democrats much more centralist position than years past. In the 2016 primaries Bernie received more votes from young voters of all demographics than both Hillary and Trump combined received from the same age group. Those voters are 4 years older and there is a new, younger wave behind them for 2020. But it isn't just the young voters. And it isn't just frustrated Democrats. Republicans are shifting too. Did anyone else happen to see the crowd at the Fox Town Hall with Bernie last night go crazy in support of Medicare for All when Bret Baier asked the audience if they would really want to shift their current coverage to Medicare for All. It was a big surprise and disappointment to the Fox hosts that thought they had actually set that question up for a big disappointment for Bernie.......and yet the overwhelming majority of the people in their audience actually wanted change. Here is the short video clip of that exchange. It was a real mic drop moment:

Fox News hosts underestimate popularity of Bernie Sanders during town hall – video

The Republicans have completely lost the health care fight. It was a political Stalingrad, but they are now in the position of Germany's 6th Army.

My SO and I talked about Bernie being top of the polls right now. He wouldn't be my first pick for nominee, I think he's too much of a one trick pony to be a great president. But he wouldn't be a bad president either. If he turns out to be the choice of the Democratic primary voters, so be it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: neroden
The momentum is swinging left of the 'Left'........or at least left of the Democrats much more centralist position than years past. In the 2016 primaries Bernie received more votes from young voters of all demographics than both Hillary and Trump combined received from the same age group. Those voters are 4 years older and there is a new, younger wave behind them for 2020. But it isn't just the young voters. And it isn't just frustrated Democrats. Republicans are shifting too. Did anyone else happen to see the crowd at the Fox Town Hall with Bernie last night go crazy in support of Medicare for All when Bret Baier asked the audience if they would really want to shift their current coverage to Medicare for All. It was a big surprise and disappointment to the Fox hosts that thought they had actually set that question up for a big disappointment for Bernie.......and yet the overwhelming majority of the people in their audience actually wanted change. Here is the short video clip of that exchange. It was a real mic drop moment:

Fox News hosts underestimate popularity of Bernie Sanders during town hall – video

Everyone is for free healthcare until they realize it's not really free.
 
Healthcare options are a Hobson's choice:
1) Let everyone who can't pay die of treatable conditions
2) Treat those who can't pay and drive them into bankruptcy then socialize the rest of the cost through the rest of the system
3) Everyone with the means gets health coverage in some way and they chip in a bit for a reasonable minimum level for those who can't afford their own

I suppose you could add a #4 which is anyone who can't pay is just taken out and shot. But only a sociopath would carry that out.

Every country in the world has one of the above except for #4. The US is #2, most of the rest of the developed world is #3, and the undeveloped and developing world is largely #1.

#2 is the most expensive for everyone.
 
Maddow did a piece on Barr's FBI can snatch foreign citizens in a different country without that country's permission memo last night.
His testimony to Congress outlined the principle conclusions of the opinion but he refused to provide the document.
The document came out years later proving Barr lied to congress about the principle conclusions.
The Senate confirmed Barr as the new AG.

Trump really has succeeded in attracting all the best people. If you are amoral and want to attract talented amoral people, Barr is the logical choice. He succeeded in covering Bush 1's rear for several years. McConnell was around back then and saw it all happen thus knowingly confirmed someone like Barr.

We really are not very good people.
 
Everyone is for free healthcare until they realize it's not really free.
My one cousin had his health insurance company refuse to pay his hospital bills from back surgery do to some bogus "pre-existing condition." He went bankrupt and lost his small business.

I have another cousin who owed tens of thousands of dollars for her cancer treatment for years. When she moved to a different state that same cancer became a pre-existing condition for the same company she had insurance with, and was without health insurance until Obamacare came along.

Meanwhile, up here in Canada, my mother was admitted to hospital the day she was diagnosed with cancer. Her hospital stay, home nurse visits, treatment, meds, even her vitamins, had a total cost of $0.

Now, which system is better?
 
Healthcare options are a Hobson's choice:
1) Let everyone who can't pay die of treatable conditions
2) Treat those who can't pay and drive them into bankruptcy then socialize the rest of the cost through the rest of the system
3) Everyone with the means gets health coverage in some way and they chip in a bit for a reasonable minimum level for those who can't afford their own

I suppose you could add a #4 which is anyone who can't pay is just taken out and shot. But only a sociopath would carry that out.

Every country in the world has one of the above except for #4. The US is #2, most of the rest of the developed world is #3, and the undeveloped and developing world is largely #1.

#2 is the most expensive for everyone.

The US does both #1 and #2. #2 is the system for people with credit lines to pull on, #1 is the system for people without that.

You have people who know they can't pay and don't even go to the doctor for something that could be caught early, and instead they die of it. You have people who can't afford medications and then ration them and die. You have people who go into the ER with a life-threatening condition, and are merely stabilized and released, rather than properly treated, and then die.

And, you've even got developing nations that are #3. Hell, some of them are even destinations for American medical tourism.
 
  • Love
Reactions: neroden
Don't you mean, now the working stiff don't have to pay into two healthcare systems? Last I checked, I was paying into medicare AND health insurance off of the same paycheck!

It's not how many system you pay into. It's how much they cost when you add them up. Do you really think Medicare for all will cost the same as what you pay into medicare now?
 
But, based on every other single-payer system in the world, you'll still come out ahead, due to the ridiculous amount the US spends (~2x what other nations spend per capita) on healthcare.

Probably not. People don't seem to understand that doctors aren't required to accept medicare as full payment. Doctors can charge whatever they want. If Medicare pays less than insurance does now, the additional cost will just be passed on to the patient.
 
Healthcare options are a Hobson's choice:
1) Let everyone who can't pay die of treatable conditions
2) Treat those who can't pay and drive them into bankruptcy then socialize the rest of the cost through the rest of the system
3) Everyone with the means gets health coverage in some way and they chip in a bit for a reasonable minimum level for those who can't afford their own

I suppose you could add a #4 which is anyone who can't pay is just taken out and shot. But only a sociopath would carry that out.

Every country in the world has one of the above except for #4. The US is #2, most of the rest of the developed world is #3, and the undeveloped and developing world is largely #1.

#2 is the most expensive for everyone.

This is a little over dramatic. With Obamacare, everyone is suppose to have access. People who can't afford to pay have very low premiums. People who can pay, pay a lot more and pay for the people who don't.

Medicare for all won't change this, it will expand it. People who make very little will pay very little in medicare taxes. As people's incomes increase, the amount of medicare tax they pay will increase.

Medicare for all is expected to increase taxes $32 Trillion over 10 years. We're spending about $7 trillion on medicare now over 10 years. Expect a HUGE tax increase.
 
PPACA grants "access", not actual care, and the system had failure designed into it by Republicans that opposed it.

We still have people literally dying of not being able to afford care. We still have a medical bankruptcy epidemic.

And, re: the "medicine a less desirable career choice" thing, I'm going to fall back to, many other developed nations manage to make this work, so we should be able to too. (Hint: the way you fix this is by fixing the student debt issues. And, a lot of inefficiencies come from middlemen in the process, and suppliers charging too much. Many other countries use either the monopsony of single payer healthcare to knock that down, or they use direct regulation of what suppliers are allowed to charge in an individual mandate system. PPACA is a poorly regulated individual mandate system.)
 
This is a little over dramatic. With Obamacare, everyone is suppose to have access. People who can't afford to pay have very low premiums. People who can pay, pay a lot more and pay for the people who don't.

Medicare for all won't change this, it will expand it. People who make very little will pay very little in medicare taxes. As people's incomes increase, the amount of medicare tax they pay will increase.

Medicare for all is expected to increase taxes $32 Trillion over 10 years. We're spending about $7 trillion on medicare now over 10 years. Expect a HUGE tax increase.
i see insurance companies taking a hit as they become useless (Rick Scott, senator from Florida supposedly used fraud to get many millions, that would end)
so no 300- 400+ billion in paper pushers, etc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.