|
Nut to Butt posted:check it out- congress controls the budget. I mean check it out even when GOP controls the house and the senate AND the oval office they STILL want to expand gov't. I don't see how anything you posted here is an argument against that, even though what you posted is true. e: You're right though, I shouldn't attribute the 90s economy to Clinton really. I just meant it's not like the GOP actually do anything but balloon the budget just as much as the Dems when they are in power. Neither party actually wants smaller gov't.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:45
|
|
neocons were disillusioned democrats)
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:26 |
|
|
Dizz posted:Why isn't DWS in prison yet for robbing bernie of a legit chance? Bad politicians dont go to jail
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
PathAsc posted:So how long are people going to defend Obamacare as the second coming while choking on government cock? Tell us more about how government shouldn't have a role in healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
The overlords want more overlordness while saying they don't and turning the classes that aren't living in opulence against each other. Guillotine, please. Two parties of loving retards, and still people vote along party lines.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
Well I Vote to Party! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Mordor She Wrote posted:Tell us more about how government shouldn't have a role in healthcare. That's not at all what I said, please tell me more about how the government intervention that was sloppily implemented was some kind of positive progress overall. I'm all for single payer, but the poo poo we got was bullshit and you know it. Single payer doesn't benefit the government, so there's that. Additionally, if they're going to require any kind of insurance for anything by law it should be a basic provision from them with the option to use other forms that are prevented from gouging prices and denying coverage. Controversial, I know.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
PathAsc posted:The overlords want more overlordness while saying they don't and turning the classes that aren't living in opulence against each other. Guillotine, please. Two parties of loving retards, and still people vote along party lines.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
like for real we could have two completely different parties right now if 2/3rds of voters didn't go "well I GOTTA vote for the GOP or Dems anything else is just tossing my vote away!!!!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:like for real we could have two completely different parties right now if 2/3rds of voters didn't go "well I GOTTA vote for the GOP or Dems anything else is just tossing my vote away!!!!" i blame chaotic solutions to the three body problem
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:like for real we could have two completely different parties right now if 2/3rds of voters didn't go "well I GOTTA vote for the GOP or Dems anything else is just tossing my vote away!!!!" no no you see, third party voters are the problem, if only you loving BASTARDS voted for MY candidate!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Basically I'd maybe consider voting 3rd party in protest when it's not some insane bullshit like picking between Donald loving Grab Them By The Pussy Trump and Boring Old White Lady but if trump isn't dead/I'm prison/left in a vegetative state by his first term then I'm all for everyone "holding their nose" and voting for a boring democrat
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:All Obama had to do was pass a law "Cannot deny due to pre-existing condition" and he would've won the day That plus medicare/medicaid expansions and staying on parents plan to 26 were massive fixes all by themselves. Of course thats going to jack up costs since insurance has to now cover people who actually need it and use it. What didn't work was relying on people to buy insurance instead of them paying the penalty. Single payer was never going to pass which yeah, gently caress the democrats who wouldn't have voted for medicare for all but thats the only way costs will get under control. Guess three things the AHCA wants kill. Ryan had a massive erection over the idea of killing medicare, the fucker was giddy when he talked about how "exciting" it was. Watch his presentation and whining about how healthy people pay for sick people, I doubt he's stupid enough to not understand that's how any insurance loving works. He knows but doesn't give a poo poo about people losing medicare/medicaid coverage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 23:32
|
|
|
Real talk: as a guy who sells insurance all day and has enrolled, conservatively, hundreds of people in ACA plans and off-market plans since 2014, the single thing that most people complain about--and rightly so--are the enrollment periods put in place by the ACA. People go off half-cocked and enroll in a plan that doesn't really fit their needs and call mid-year to change policies and can't because they don't have a qualifying life event. People bitch about the costs of high-deductible plans until they realize the minimum essential benefits and guarantee issue serve them well when poo poo hits the fan. When clients or prospects complain about how they're "paying for people to have free insurance," I remind them that healthy people in networks always eat the costs of the sick and injured in the pool and that people who were previously uninsurable due to , say, cancer, are now not immediately dying and leaving their families homeless because of medical debt. But, y'know, bootstraps and welfare queens and immigrants and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
CarpenterWalrus posted:Real talk: as a guy who sells insurance all day and has enrolled, conservatively, hundreds of people in ACA plans and off-market plans since 2014, the single thing that most people complain about--and rightly so--are the enrollment periods put in place by the ACA. People go off half-cocked and enroll in a plan that doesn't really fit their needs and call mid-year to change policies and can't because they don't have a qualifying life event. People bitch about the costs of high-deductible plans until they realize the minimum essential benefits and guarantee issue serve them well when poo poo hits the fan. When clients or prospects complain about how they're "paying for people to have free insurance," I remind them that healthy people in networks always eat the costs of the sick and injured in the pool and that people who were previously uninsurable due to , say, cancer, are now not immediately dying and leaving their families homeless because of medical debt. Yes, now they die much later after racking up even more bills! Truly this is good because ACA and high deductibles are good and cool!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 00:51
|
|
|
PathAsc posted:Yes, now they die much later after racking up even more bills! Truly this is good because ACA and high deductibles are good and cool! Financial exposure is limited by max-out-of-pocket caps. Do you know how insurance works?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:I mean check it out even when GOP controls the house and the senate AND the oval office they STILL want to expand gov't. I just hate that historical narrative touting sole Clintonian credit for the surplus, because it means one of two things: 1) the person knows very little and is parroting the Dem talking point, or 2) the person is not an honest interlocutor. Either way, it's not a promising sign for forthright and fruitful discussion. I also think "They want a nanny state just as much as the Dems do except theirs is a fundamentalist religious one." is ridiculous hyperbole, especially considering that the religious right and the budget hawks are separate wings of the Republican party. There is certainly some overlap, but much of the Republican professional political class regard the religious right as their cross to bear, an alliance of necessity. It's similar to how the Democratic professional political class regard the economic left, although that is a much smaller part of their coalition. The thing is that the modern conservative movement didn't really exist as a political force until the 1970s, and never had unified control of government until George W's administration. Reagan was, arguably, the only "true" modern conservative President, but even he comes with caveats. He had to deal with the budgetary realities of divided Congressional control, as well as the geopolitical demands of the Cold War. Bush the Elder was very much a creature of the state (former CIA Director), and his biggest mistake was the betrayal of his pledge of "no new taxes." The unified Democratic Congress was more than happy to help him tie his own noose. So, here comes the backlash in the form of Ross Perot, that Ron Paul looking and sounding mofo who got 19% of the popular vote in 1992. So, the Great Triangulator won the Presidency, yet began governing as if he ran a liberal campaign! He turfs out the old battleaxe to redesign American healthcare, and that goes down in flames. Here comes the Republican Revolution in 1994, and the Contract with America. This was The Moment for modern conservatism, and Republicans delivered for the most part, though some major planks got rolled back eventually. The big ones were federal term limits (unconstitutional), the line item veto (holy poo poo, they tried to give this to an opposing party President! Unconstitutional.), and the balanced budget amendment which never quite made it (failed by 1 vote in the Senate). Anyhow, the way these things go is that after the initial revolutionary moment is over, everyone gets real loving comfortable being one of the most powerful and influential people in the world. By the time George W came around, the dissolution was well under way. The betrayals of principle committed during W's administration planted the seeds for the next revolutionary wave election in 2010, leading directly to the Freedom Caucus, who catch bipartisan Washington hatred because they want to curtail Washington's power. Obviously, that's a highly abridged version of the history from a semi-sympathetic point of view, but pointing to George W's administration as proof that Republicans love spending just as much as Democrats is.. an iffy proposition, given historical context. You know what I mean? These things are cyclical, and movements must strike when the iron is hot. The opportunities have been pretty drat limited, especially considering the time frames we're dealing with, and the seductiveness of the swamp. That's not even getting into the whole urban/rural party political realignment (a process that only took about 40 years to play out in its entirety). Anyhow, I find this chart helpful for perspective. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
lol imagine seeing flaws in this country and believing that Donald Trump would be the reasonable option to fix them. Because it's just so obviously no big deal to have a sitting president lose a $25,000,000 lawsuit against his shady-rear end "business" classes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:29
|
|
|
Tumble posted:lol imagine seeing flaws in this country and believing that Donald Trump would be the reasonable option to fix them. Because it's just so obviously no big deal to have a sitting president lose a $25,000,000 lawsuit against his shady-rear end "business" classes. Imagine still thinking that. people like that exist and some of them even post here in earnest
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
just watch as more of them post right now.......
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
Toasticle posted:That plus medicare/medicaid expansions and staying on parents plan to 26 were massive fixes all by themselves. Of course thats going to jack up costs since insurance has to now cover people who actually need it and use it. What didn't work was relying on people to buy insurance instead of them paying the penalty. Single payer was never going to pass which yeah, gently caress the democrats who wouldn't have voted for medicare for all but thats the only way costs will get under control. I genuinely believe that the provisions in the proposed AHCA bill (AKA Ryan/Trumpcare) permanently soured working class people who voted for Trump. This bill provided irrefutable proof that Trump doesn't give a gently caress about them, and that his populist rhetoric was all bullshit from the get-go. Did I also mention the almost $900,000,000,000 cut to Medicaid in his budget proposal? If those people in the Rustbelt don't understand the republican agenda—which is letting you die in the street—by now, they never will.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
CarpenterWalrus posted:Financial exposure is limited by max-out-of-pocket caps. Do you know how insurance works? Yes, I do. That doesn't stop companies from raking you over the coals for every little thing they can, nor does it stop medical care from coding poo poo wrong. Have you not been exposed to this? It's business, they don't give a gently caress about you, just the bottom line. Would that I could live in the dream land of non capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 11:32
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:I genuinely believe that the provisions in the proposed AHCA bill (AKA Ryan/Trumpcare) permanently soured working class people who voted for Trump. This bill provided irrefutable proof that Trump doesn't give a gently caress about them, and that his populist rhetoric was all bullshit from the get-go. Did I also mention the almost $900,000,000,000 cut to Medicaid in his budget proposal? If those people in the Rustbelt don't understand the republican agenda—which is letting you die in the street—by now, they never will. But you see, it's OTHER people who will die! Not them! They're not elderly or infirm! And it's not like everyone is likely to die one way or the other! It's a very small minority of people you see.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 12:45
|
|
|
People didn't vote for trump, they lashed out at what they saw as the establishment. Of course people didn't like the new ahca; once again, it's more of the same. They voted time and again for hope and change, whether it came wrapped in a black or white or orange package
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
That's the equivalent of burning your house down because you don't like the wallpaper and the floors are creaky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
Trump is bad because he failed the only thing he supposed to do: To be something new, someone else who would shake things up enough so things would change. He's just like every other politician except more retarded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 14:40
|
|
|
Bholder posted:Trump is bad because he failed the only thing he supposed to do: To be something new, someone else who would shake things up enough so things would change. He's just like every other politician except more retarded. Yeah this is the worst of it, I voted Clinton but reluctantly admitted to myself that if Trump won maybe he would avoid establishment politics and maybe he actually plans to be straightforward and frank with the country about issues, even if it's taking a more conservative approach... and he's not. He's still dancing around Obamacare like your typical Republican, he still lies, it's disappointing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 14:52
|
|
|
Tin Can Hit Man posted:That's the equivalent of burning your house down because you don't like the wallpaper and the floors are creaky. no it's not
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Spunky Psycho Ho posted:All Obama had to do was pass a law "Cannot deny due to pre-existing condition" and he would've won the day You're overplaying your "I'm a retard" gimmick
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 15:50
|
|
|
Bholder posted:Trump is bad because he failed the only thing he supposed to do: To be something new, someone else who would shake things up enough so things would change. He's just like every other politician except more retarded. Everyone with half a brain cell saw the scam coming from a mile away and warned about it. Seriosly, you had to be a medical grade retard to expect anything else from Trump but corruption and incompetence on an unprecedented scale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Raspberry Jam It In Me posted:Everyone with half a brain cell saw the scam coming from a mile away and warned about it. Seriosly, you had to be a medical grade retard to expect anything else from Trump but corruption and incompetence on an unprecedented scale. He's a conman and his entire history of "deals" is him loving over others to benefit himself
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
In 2000 Donald Trump told Fortune magazine, “It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
then it should have been an easy win for his challenger
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Yea, Bernie would have won
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Unfortunately the dnc colluded to run the most hated woman in the country and just assumed that everyone would vote for her because her opponent was obviously stupid and a liar. Wrong
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Blue Train posted:Yea, Bernie would have won Yea
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
IT WAS HER TURN* *screamed millions of idiots like that was a good reason
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
Just a reminder: http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/31/politics/donald-trump-executive-order-signing-walk-out/ quote:President Donald Trump walked out of an executive order signing ceremony Friday -- without actually signing the orders.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
PathAsc posted:IT WAS HER TURN* I don't think too many people actually felt that way. More that her long history of experience was reason enough to vote her in. E: Which is kind of the same as saying It's Her Turn but isn't as baseless. Toadvine fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
i heard a hell of a lot more people calling her a bitch than I heard people using the term "her turn"
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:26 |
|
|
this is gonna be a long week of all spunky and no moridin
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2017 16:59
|
|