Page 32 of 667 FirstFirst ... 222829303132333435364282132532 ... LastLast
Results 466 to 480 of 10005
  1. #466
    Incredible Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    914

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    And the French, the Germans, every Scandinavian country etc has a system similar to "medicare for all" and much lower rates of maternal mortality than the US.
    Hi, I am french and yes, what we call i France "la sécurité sociale" (the social security) has saved countless lives. Of course it has a cost for the country. But the healthcare of our citizens is more important than that. A few years ago, my father had three cancers in a year. At that time he was unemployed. In the USA, he would have died or got broke for life, I suppose. In france, everything was taken in charge and he didn't have to spend a Euro on it. That's in pat why he's still here today!
    Thank you, sécurité sociale!

  2. #467
    Invincible Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    This points to my biggest concern with ideas like Medicare for All. While I agree that there may be ways to make the medical, medical insurance, and pharmaceutical industries more fiscally responsible and less wasteful financially, the downside maybe that going after hospitals and the rest could risk making the health care available less care driven. Medicare for All might risk turning medical treatment into a factory, with patients being treated like car parts on an assembly line.

    Doctors and hospitals that lose money are going to be forced to cut costs. For Doctors, this means seeing a higher number of patients in a shorter amount of time. For hospitals this could mean cutting back on staff, hiring fewer doctors and nurses, and forgoing investments in newer technology that could potentially save more lives.

    Even for the Pharmaceutical Industry, which I agree needs oversight big time, there is a risk. The industry might decide to stop research into drugs for less common (though potentially more life threatening) medical conditions in favor of promoting the more commonly used medications.

    My point being that, while improving the health care system overall and proving affordable medical coverage to everyone is important, it needs to be done with great care and thought.
    People under Medicare are the most happy with their coverage. Compared to for-profits. The for profit system doesn't work to insure all Americans affordably. period
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  3. #468
    Mighty Member TheDarman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wjowski View Post
    You make it sound like none of that's happened already. Profit-driven healthcare has been a horror movie for the U.S.
    Except the hospitals also employ doctors: folks who have hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt to be professionals in this area. One of the first consequences of cost-cutting to hospitals will be reduced salaries for the staff. If we want to find out what effect that’ll have, look at the teaching profession. In addition to strikes, we could see a lot of the very best in the profession move onwards because they just can’t make it work in schools with progressively limited resources.

    Additionally, lost in all this concern about cost-cutting is what the actual effect of that is. Sure, it’ll save the government a lot of money and can push back against critics that say it costs too much. However, a fifth of our nation’s GDP is tied up in health care spending. Proportionally, eliminating wide swaths of “wasted money” going to this industry wouldn’t just make it cheaper, and make the government wholly responsible for a fifth of the nation’s economy, it would instantly contract the nation’s GDP. There’s a lot of cost in overhead to health insurance. We all know this and it is why a lot of us want private insurance eliminated. However, that will change—for better with costs and worse with our GDP output. Even worse, many proposals, such as this one, are intent on contracting it further by eliminating what had previously been considered non-negotiable spending (hospitals). At best, you’re looking at a contraction of 3% in GDP from this move. There has never been a contraction in GDP, annually, that hasn’t led to a recession.

    Sanders proposal to get the money through taxes, also, won’t enable the economy to boom in other regards. Regardless of what you want to say about Trump’s tax cuts, tax cuts do stimulate the economy, especially when those tax cuts are oriented towards people who actually spend the money they get rather than liquidating it in high-end real estate or luxury items that put those items only further out of reach of consumers down the socioeconomic ladder (this is the problem with a Republican tax cuts). Sanders, with this proposal, will be contracting spending money, potentially the only saving grace for the contraction in GDP that this will cause.

    How many presidents, who can legitimately be blamed for causing a recession, get a second term?
    With Great Power, Comes Great Responsibility

    Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

  4. #469
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Trump again jokes about staying on as president for more than two terms

    President Trump on Thursday joked about serving more than two terms as president, telling a crowd that he might remain in the Oval Office “at least for 10 or 14 years.”

    Trump made the comments on the same day that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report was released to the public.

    At an event for the Wounded Warrior Project, Lt. Gen. Michael S. Linnington, chief executive of the veterans charity, gave Trump a trophy to thank him for his support.

    “Well, this is really beautiful,” Trump told the crowd in the East Room of the White House. “This will find a permanent place, at least for six years, in the Oval Office. Is that okay?”

    After some laughter from the crowd, Trump continued: “I was going to joke, General, and say at least for 10 or 14 years, but we would cause bedlam if I said that, so we’ll say six.”
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  5. #470
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Sri Lanka Bombings Live Updates: ‘It Was a River of Blood’

    As Christians in Sri Lanka gathered on Sunday morning to celebrate Easter Mass, the culmination of Holy Week, powerful explosions ripped through three churches packed with worshipers, leaving hundreds of victims amid a havoc of splintered and blood-spattered pews.

    In what the police said were coordinated attacks carried out by a single group, bombers also struck three five-star hotels popular with tourists. At least 207 people were killed and 450 others injured, a police spokesman, Ruwan Gunasekera, said.

    News of the bombings, the largest targeted attack on South Asian Christians in recent memory, rippled out all Easter morning, interrupting celebrations across the world. Pope Francis, after celebrating Mass in St. Peter’s Square, said the attacks had “brought mourning and sorrow” on the most important of Christian holidays.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  6. #471
    Invincible Member Kirby101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    20,470

    Default

    It is debatable if tax cuts stimulate the economy enough to justify their effect on the budget. Long term deficits also have consequences.
    There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!

  7. #472
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    It is debatable if tax cuts stimulate the economy enough to justify their effect on the budget. Long term deficits also have consequences.
    In the economy as well as in all things related to the economy, including Health care, there is a seesaw effect. Multiple seesaws all teetering on a wave of effects from one thing to another.

    You can't jump on one end of one seesaw and exclaim 'Problem Solved' without considering the effect it will have on all the others.

    All I am hoping for is that the next president, then next Democrat President, not rush into anything without careful consideration.

    The ACA was well thought out, if imperfect. It wasn't Medicare for All since it also wasn't designed to create a major increase in the deficit.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  8. #473
    Astonishing Member jetengine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,990

    Default

    All I'm consistently seeing is americans hate to pay tax even if its to help them.

  9. #474
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    5,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetengine View Post
    All I'm consistently seeing is americans hate to pay tax even if its to help them.
    I currently live in Colorado, they have TABOR, which to not go into too much detail is a part of the state constitution that any tax increase needs to be voted on by the public. This past election, there was a popular bill to increase funding for schools and only people making over $250k would ever have to pay that portion of the tax. Didn't matter, got shot down. Every single tax increase got shot down.

  10. #475
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jetengine View Post
    All I'm consistently seeing is americans hate to pay tax even if its to help them.
    Some Americans' do. The attitude is that 'I earned the money it's mine, why should I give it away to anyone?'. Most of them are short sighted and ignorant.

    It doesn't help when they hear about wealthy people getting away with only paying a fraction of the taxes that they normally would be paying.

    However, some can't bring themselves to criticize the wealthy, so instead the criticize the poor. Doing so make them feel wealthier, and more privileged than they really are. Also, the poor aren't a real threat, just an imaginary made up one. It's easier to go after them than to go after the wealthy owner of the company you work for who might retaliate by firing you or laying you off from work.

    It's pretty crazy.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  11. #476

    Default


    On this date in 2015, 2016, 2017, as well as 2018, "Crazy/Stupid Republican of the Day" published profiles of Tony Tinderholt, a member of the Texas House of Representatives and Jared Lee Loughner look-alike who hangs out with anti-immigrant militia groups and talks about arming Americans all along the U.S./Mexico border to stop Mexicans from taking “free stuff” and “thieving”. His solution to the immigration crisis is “people are going to die and that’s the only thing that is going to stop migrants from taking the lifeblood of our country.” Tinderholt has also told open-carry advocates in his district to call him immediately if the police even question them for wandering around with a firearm. Best of all was Tinderholt’s reaction to a Texas probate judge ruling that the state must comply with the Supreme Court’s rulings on same sex marriage… Tinderholt tried rallying against the judge for this, but in his effort online to do so, named the wrong case and the wrong judge. Making his crusade to protect the sanctity of marriage on Christian principles even more ridiculous and hypocritical is the fact that Tinderholt has been divorced four times, and is on his fifth marriage by the age of 44. He also has been under an ethics investigation for “misplacing” $15,000 in campaign funds, something that is not shocking when you consider that back in 1999, one of his ex-wives and employees were embezzling money from a child care business he ran to buy crack cocaine (at least it was without Tinderholt’s knowledge). Since being allowed to continue his legislative career into a second term, he has already shown no signs of chilling out, now directing his attention towards abortion. And like any Tinderholt effort, it's extreme and insane. He sponsored HB 948, "The Abolition of Abortion in Texas Act". Tinderholt followed up just that inflammatory idea with a series of quotes that take misogyny towards a level best described as completely insulting:

    Right now, it’s real easy. Right now, they don’t make it important to be personally responsible because they know that they have a backup of ‘oh, I can just go get an abortion.’ Now, we both know that consenting adults don’t always think smartly sometimes. But consenting adults need to also consider the repercussions of the sexual relationship that they’re gonna have, which is a child.”
    Yes, those pesky wimmenfolk just don't know anything about being personally responsible about sex, amirite, fellas? Especially the rape and incest victims who aren't exempted by the bill Tinderholt just wrote, those non-smartly thinking consenting adults. (Please note those past two sentences are laced with all of the sarcasm I can muster.)

    People did ask Tinderholt why he makes no exceptions for rape or incest, and this was his response:

    "I'm a firm believer that God creates children in his own image, regardless of how that child is brought into the world, it’s created in his image, and how can someone want to destroy that? I don’t think that there should be any exceptions to murder, no matter what. So, if this child was out of the womb and it was a child that was born out of rape or incest, no one would be OK with killing a child. I look at it like that child is a child in the womb, just like it’s out.”
    So unless a rapist were to father a child that looks non-human, Tinderholt feels everyone should be thrilled. Got it. Oh, and we'll point out that while Tinderholt feels there should be no exceptions to murder, he's still fine with the death penalty. Last we checked, executioners are an exception to murder, so there's that.

    We don’t have too much to update of late on Tony Tinderholt, save for the fact that in May of 2017, he sabotaged a bill to create stricter penalties for animal cruelty amending it to remove that punishment, and stating his desire to do so was out of spite over his previous legislation on abortion not passing to criminalize it.

    Tony Tinderholt won re-election with a less-than-comfrotable 52% of the vote. He promptly went back to work trying to criminalize all abortion, this time specifying in his legislation that it would be murder every time a zygote was killed after FERTILIZATION. Yes, outlawing abortion isn’t extreme enough for this twit, he’s going to blunder his way into criminalizing birth control pills as murder punishable by death while he’s at it. Sounds really "pro-life" doesn't it?

    We can’t believe we keep having to say this, but anti-government kooks should not be elected into government.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  12. #477
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    Mets is using more of his normal "factual lies". SS is funded from a trust and SS taxes, not the general fund. And it is mostly funded for 75 years (indexing the ceiling would so
    The vast, vast majority of the tax cuts went to the wealthy.

    A few cents for the middle class is part of the con job you conservative pull.

    https://www.npr.org/2017/12/19/57175...e-middle-class

    And of course we see that they did baloon the deficit with litlle impact to the economy.

    But that is what yourParty wants. The true deficit creators.

    And you live in NY Mets. You know the prpoerty tax deduction hurt a lot of middle class people here. You are being disengenuous, again.
    I didn't say SS isn't funded, although there are concerns that it will soon pay out more than it's taking in.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/polit...uts/index.html

    Looking at a calculator, middle class people will save anything from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars on their liability.

    https://taxfoundation.org/tax-calculator/

    A single person with two kids making $52,000 saves about $1,892. A married couple with two kids making $82,000 save about $2,253.

    There is a misunderstanding about the effect of the tax cuts since it came with an increase in take-home pay so some people are disappointed by the size of their refunds. The media has screwed up in its role in educating the public.

    I do live in New York, and with a middle class income just over median national income, my state and local taxes are under $5,500 combined.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    I agree, he committed crimes, he should be impeach. But the impact on the election seems to be a part of the discussion against.

    I notice you didn't react to your Party's **** show against Hillary. Was that the "moral" thing to do?
    Republicans probably went too far on that one, although Democrats screwed up in the aftermath as well (I can't think of anything any Republican said as problematic as Hillary telling someone she'll prosecute the American who lit a koran on fire.)

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarman View Post
    These were programs that were still being paid for prior to Bush’s election in 2000 and subsequent massive tax cuts (mostly for the rich) after he got into office. We had a surplus then. Following Bush and the massive increases in “defense” spending, we ended up with a deficit that only went down when Obama got into office.



    That’s really anywhere between $150 billion every year in losses of tax revenue to $230 billion a year. That does add up in a budget. And the only reason it isn’t worse is because they cut certain credits that people got prior (you no longer get breaks if you live in a high tax state, for example). A lot of people were taking advantage of those in highly populous places in America: California and New York for examples.



    Again, it depends on your geography. In Florida, definitely. In places like Colorado, New York, and California. Frankly it is also disingenuous to claim the benefits weren’t concentrated to the wealthy.



    Not really. A number of those deductions hurt middle class individuals in high tax areas.



    In Colorado, I paid at my part time job a total of $9,000 in state taxes (without local taxes included) while I was in school (that was before a pretty small, comparatively, refund). These also add up quick and virtually anyone working full time, even at a service level job, would it exceed that here and certainly in places like New York and California.
    As of 2016, Colorado state taxes were 4.16% of federal taxable income.

    https://www.bankrate.com/finance/tax...-colorado.aspx

    To get a total of $9,000 in state taxes, unless there has been a recent drastic tax increase, your federal taxable income would have to be about $216,000.

    As far as I can tell, the debt increased every year under President Clinton.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDarman View Post
    That’s also a great point. The focus should be on discretionary spending (i.e. spending that is actually eligible for yearly review). Pointing to Medicare (the elimination of which hurts seniors who have no real, affordable private alternative and would never have one) is ridiculous and cruel. Guess what is the most we spend in discretionary spending? Military spending; where we spend more than the next twenty-five countries behind us combined. Fun fact! If we were to spend as much as the nearest country behind us, the low-point deficit under Obama would’ve approached $0 alone.
    Mandatory spending is still spending. And it's nearly two-thirds.

    So it would be dishonest not to consider major sources of spending. Just because Congress has automated Medicare spending doesn't mean we should ignore 15% of the federal budget in discussions about costs (even if the end of the conversation may be a decision to keep an important program as is.)

    It's a third rail politically, but that's a different discussion.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  13. #478
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    2,102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    In the economy as well as in all things related to the economy, including Health care, there is a seesaw effect. Multiple seesaws all teetering on a wave of effects from one thing to another.

    You can't jump on one end of one seesaw and exclaim 'Problem Solved' without considering the effect it will have on all the others.

    All I am hoping for is that the next president, then next Democrat President, not rush into anything without careful consideration.

    The ACA was well thought out, if imperfect. It wasn't Medicare for All since it also wasn't designed to create a major increase in the deficit.
    But here is the problem, how much is the current health care system costing?

    The US spends far more of its GDP on health care than Canada, Japan, Australia, Western Europe, etc. Why is that? Does the US have far better health outcomes than these other countries? I do not think.

    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...alth-outcomes/

    Here's a thing people do not realize, fiscal conservatism is a scam, conservatives will complain about the debt when in opposition, but will dramatically increase the debt when in power, as an excuse to slash spending on social programs, they will never actually reduce the debt and will just use it as a club against Democrats, do conservatives ask how they going to pay for military ''adventures'' in Iraq, a stupid border wall or anything else they waste money on that will make the world a worse place? No, they just do it and they have been winning for decades, as long as you play a game where you have to follow the rules and they do not, you lose.

    This whole ''how will we pay for it?'' question, means you are playing their game and letting set the terms of the debate. Ultimately I think a Medicare for all program will save money, but that will not happen right away, it will take time to right the ship, but of the two paths that are available, both are costly, but Medicare for All will ultimately save money in the long run.

    Also, why can't the US reduce military spending, stop the upper-class tax cuts, reduce or end corporate subsidies or reduce the US' massive prison population to make up for the cost of a needed health care overhaul? I think of ways that will save money and will make society better in the long run. Sometimes you have to invest in the future, you have to spend money, but currently the US system produces a bunch of wasteful spending that seems to exist only as a form of corporate welfare, the whole system needs an overhaul to be cost-effective and efficient, not to mention more humane.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    I didn't say SS isn't funded, although there are concerns that it will soon pay out more than it's taking in.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/05/polit...uts/index.html

    Looking at a calculator, middle class people will save anything from a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars on their liability.

    https://taxfoundation.org/tax-calculator/

    A single person with two kids making $52,000 saves about $1,892. A married couple with two kids making $82,000 save about $2,253.

    There is a misunderstanding about the effect of the tax cuts since it came with an increase in take-home pay so some people are disappointed by the size of their refunds. The media has screwed up in its role in educating the public.

    I do live in New York, and with a middle class income just over median national income, my state and local taxes are under $5,500 combined.

    Republicans probably went too far on that one, although Democrats screwed up in the aftermath as well (I can't think of anything any Republican said as problematic as Hillary telling someone she'll prosecute the American who lit a koran on fire.)

    As of 2016, Colorado state taxes were 4.16% of federal taxable income.

    https://www.bankrate.com/finance/tax...-colorado.aspx

    To get a total of $9,000 in state taxes, unless there has been a recent drastic tax increase, your federal taxable income would have to be about $216,000.

    As far as I can tell, the debt increased every year under President Clinton.

    Mandatory spending is still spending. And it's nearly two-thirds.

    So it would be dishonest not to consider major sources of spending. Just because Congress has automated Medicare spending doesn't mean we should ignore 15% of the federal budget in discussions about costs (even if the end of the conversation may be a decision to keep an important program as is.)

    It's a third rail politically, but that's a different discussion.
    Honest question, when is the last time a Federal Republican Presidential administration has reduced the debt?

    This is why I think fiscal conservatism is a scam and a lie, conservatives complain about the debt in opposition, but when in power, they intentionally drive up with through massive military spending, upper-class tax cuts and whatever other pet projects they have, to cut funding for social programs.

    https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-10-...cit-hawks-gone

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancol.../#562159b74694

    https://newrepublic.com/article/1470...will-never-die

    This is not incompetent, it's not a mistake, it's on purpose, it's by design, the GOP benefits by having the deficit around, to use as a club against the Dems when in opposition. This why I do not take fiscal conservatives seriously, they are either in on the scam and

    Also, can you answer why the US spends more on health care than other Western democracies and has worse outcomes?

    https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...alth-outcomes/

    If socialized medicine is so bad, why do these countries spend less money on health care? The GOP benefits from the waste in the American system, they have no desire to turn it around, despite their protests to contrary. Actions speak louder then words and the GOP's actions prove that fiscal conservatism is a sham.
    Last edited by The Overlord; 04-21-2019 at 10:20 AM.

  14. #479
    Ultimate Member Malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Freeville, NY
    Posts
    12,152

    Default

    Something occurred to me today, which gave me a way for whoever the Democratic candidate is next year, to defeat Trump. I was listening to the George Carlin channel on my satellite radio and he was doing a routine entitled Stupid Bullshit, and the line that got me was how, "...bullshit is the glue that binds us together was a society. Where would we be without our good old American bullshit?"

    And it's true. We Americans prefer comfortable bullshit to uncomfortable truth, and we've been voting that way in Presidential elections at least since Reagan. That even includes Democratic Presidents. Bush I said "Read my lips. No new taxes." When he went back on that promise, we voted for Bill Clinton's comfortable bullshit. We even voted for Barack Obama's comfortable bullshit that we would close Guantanamo Bay, when we should have known how logistically impossible that would be.

    So that's the way for a Democratic candidate to defeat Trump. Find an uncomfortable truth and replace it with comfortable bullshit. I know that may be hard since Trump is about 90% bullshit and has been since long before he decided to go into politics. But there are a few. Declare that your administration will be 100% corruption free. We know that probably won't happen, but we'll love hearing it. Claim that your press secretary will always tell the truth. Vow that you will never lust after your own daughter. All right, that last one probably would be true even for any Republican other than Trump. But my point is that's what we want in a candidate even if we know it's all bullshit. And it might just be the best way for a Democratic candidate to win next year.

  15. #480
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    8,387

    Default

    White man will doom us all.

    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •