|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I can't imagine anyone complaining about booker sponsoring bernie's bill, Booker's from loving New Jersey, ya dingus. Also you've been labeled as such because you're a real whiny dingus, ya dingus.
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:39 |
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Regime change is already happening. slowly, and needs to be faster, but democrats are definately going through a change right now. I am not sure just changing the top people is enough as we also have to change the voters. Regime change is happening? You really are delusional.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Condiv posted:um, nice backhanded compliment i guess? Not intentional, I have used my mistrust of this thread to shitpost, and I will try and not do that as there are some very legitimate good faith posters here that want what I want, but use very different means. Not everyone is NFS, and it took some time for me to see this. WampaLord really helped me with this as well. Jizz Festival posted:Jesus christ it's like you literally can't write a post without whining about something in it. I truly belong.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Booker's from loving New Jersey, ya dingus. while NJ senate seats are safely held D seats, I won't take that for granted in this day and age. An attempt to depose Booker needs to take that potential risk into account. AstheWorldWorlds posted:Regime change is happening? You really are delusional. Yes, if you think the dem leadership is in the same mindset now as it was 8 years ago I don't know what to tell you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
What if instead of having to change the voters, dems needed to appeal to voters?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
ReadyToHuman posted:What if instead of having to change the voters, dems needed to appeal to voters? por que no los dos?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I lived in CA at the time, and I am not exactly sure what you wanted from that bill. It was A single payer bill, but not exactly a good one. I would much rather move for a MFA than sand up a new system with no structure. "The democrats suck so much that their plan was really lovely" isn't a great defense of them not going forward with single payer in the most populous state in the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Skyscraper posted:Nobody loving cares, this is not the trump thread.  What about this, moron? : Well, here is a clear answer. Nobody cares, get out!Liberal arguments in a nutshell. Snowflakes can't handle the truth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:por que no los dos? Because the majority of the electorate is already right about things like single-payer and has been since before the ACA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:"The democrats suck so much that their plan was really lovely" isn't a great defense of them not going forward with single payer in the most populous state in the country. It was a lovely implementation if single payer, yes. A phase in of medicare for all would be much better than blowing up the insurance industry overnight.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It was a lovely implementation if single payer, yes. A phase in of medicare for all would be much better than blowing up the insurance industry overnight. i'm not really gonna cry any tears over the insurance industry they're the same greedy fucks who decided obama's handout wasn't enough for them and have started exiting the ACA marketplaces
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
ReadyToHuman posted:Because the majority of the electorate is already right about things like single-payer and has been since before the ACA. Right, and the leadership is beginning to change as well. The voter's change in opinions usually precedes their representatives also holding those opinions. Funny that. That doesn't mean there aren't voters who can't be converted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Yes, if you think the dem leadership is in the same mindset now as it was 8 years ago I don't know what to tell you. Elites getting spooked and having a variety of reactions is not regime change.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:while NJ senate seats are safely held D seats, I won't take that for granted in this day and age. An attempt to depose Booker needs to take that potential risk into account. Y'know, it's precisely because of this dumbshit unreasonable standard you're holding any attempt at changing things to is why people label you a bad dem cultist. It's like you've missed that you've been letting people like Booker run the party straight into the loving ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:46
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm not really gonna cry any tears over the insurance industry The industry? No. The people that rely on paychecks to survive? Yes. There are hundreds of thousands of people who work in insurance, medical billing, and related fields that would have been directly negatively impacted, and any plan should have measures to lessen the burden on these people during a transition. executives can gently caress off though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:The industry? No. The people that rely on paychecks to survive? Yes. There are hundreds of thousands of people who work in insurance, medical billing, and related fields that would have been directly negatively impacted, and any plan should have measures to lessen the burden on these people during a transition. executives can gently caress off though. you mean like a functioning social safety net?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:48
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Y'know, it's precisely because of this dumbshit unreasonable standard you're holding any attempt at changing things to is why people label you a bad dem cultist. It's like you've missed that you've been letting people like Booker run the party straight into the loving ground. I'll take that one and own up to it. The fear of change has crippled the democrats, and we need to work to fix that. I'm ready to change it, but don't get mad if my risk aversion comes back avery now and again.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm not really gonna cry any tears over the insurance industry You can execute insurance company CEOs in the streets for all I care but any plan to do single payer has to figure out how to avoid crashing the global economy due to so much of our GDP and employment being in healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:you mean like a functioning social safety net? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:You can execute insurance company CEOs in the streets for all I care but any plan to do single payer has to figure out how to avoid crashing the global economy due to so much of our GDP and employment being in healthcare. for some reason this argument doesn't apply to the industries being automated away, or being outsourced to death...
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:you mean like a functioning social safety net? "No my man. By entrenching the insurance industry firmly in society and enshrining it in law. It'd be cruel to subject Good, White Collar folk to the depridations of the failing economy and welfare state my ideology has caused."
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:You can execute insurance company CEOs in the streets for all I care but any plan to do single payer has to figure out how to avoid crashing the global economy due to so much of our GDP and employment being in healthcare. Just out of curiosity, when has government regulation caused a market crash?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I'll take that one and own up to it. The fear of change has crippled the democrats, and we need to work to fix that. I'm ready to change it, but don't get mad if my risk aversion comes back avery now and again. Well, fair enough. EDIT: Though I'd argue that not shaking things up carries a much greater risk than doing so at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Condiv posted:for some reason this argument doesn't apply to the industries being automated away, or being outsourced to death... It actually does, there's a reason UBI keeps getting floated. We should be talking more about automation than we are. Jizz Festival posted:Just out of curiosity, when has government regulation caused a market crash? I'm talking about any kind of plans to nationalize healthcare outright, you can kill the insurance companies slowly via Medicare for All style public options but any kind of hard shock would end badly. That's what happens when we let a stupid industry become 18% of GDP of the largest economy on earth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Well, fair enough. I agree, which is what made me come around on this point. We've allowed ourselves to stagnate and the rot has set in. i don't always agree on where the rot is, but it doesn't matter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:It actually does, there's a reason UBI keeps getting floated. We should be talking more about automation than we are. i'm still not fond of the argument that the current healthcare system, which kills plenty (and killed my friend) should be upheld till we get even more unachievable social policy in place
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Condiv posted:for some reason this argument doesn't apply to the industries being automated away, or being outsourced to death... it should.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
You're a goddamn fool if you think the insurance companies are going to allow themselves to slowly die. When will moderates realize these forces do not rest, they wait and recoup and then come back at you like demons and usually succeed. We've already gone through this with the failure of social democracy, to give a recent example.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i'm still not fond of the argument that the current healthcare system, which kills plenty (and killed my friend) should be upheld till we get even more unachievable social policy in place l'm not disagreeing with you on a morality basis.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
AstheWorldWorlds posted:You're a goddamn fool if you think the insurance companies are going to allow themselves to slowly die. Goddamn this. You don't drag it out and give the fuckers time to fight back, you drive a stake through their heart in one go. Any economic worries are dumb anyway, it's not like people living paycheck to paycheck are just going to sit on whatever money they now don't have to pay to the insurance companies, they'll spend that on other things. Might even stimulate the economy in the end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Two pages late but... At a minimum, pro-UHC messaging should cut down on how often UHC advocacy garners accusations of ~brogressivism~ and that's probably the most Centrists have done for my quality of life in the last half decade
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I'm talking about any kind of plans to nationalize healthcare outright, you can kill the insurance companies slowly via Medicare for All style public options but any kind of hard shock would end badly. When has nationalizing an industry ever caused a market crash?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:When has nationalizing an industry ever caused a market crash? Ask Venezuela. And Cuba. And Eastern Europe . . .
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:When has nationalizing an industry ever caused a market crash? The nationalization isn't the problem, the problem is that those jobs and businesses are redundant and an explicit goal of public healthcare is eliminating them. This is a good thing. Period. Those resources would be better spent on other things. But if ~10% of GDP and hundreds of thousands of jobs disappear in a short period we call that a depression. Having a global economic crash blamed squarely on leftist policy is bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The nationalization isn't the problem, the problem is that those jobs and businesses are redundant and an explicit goal of public healthcare is eliminating them. This I healthcare was 5% of GDP, i wouldn't care. But insurance companies have purposefully made themselves too big to fail. deflate them, and let the linger in a much smaller private insurance market.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:The nationalization isn't the problem, the problem is that those jobs and businesses are redundant and an explicit goal of public healthcare is eliminating them. The change wouldn't come out of nowhere, there would be time after the passing of the plan but before its execution for everything to adjust.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:The change wouldn't come out of nowhere, there would be time after the passing of the plan but before its execution for everything to adjust. I should hope so. All I'm saying is that healthcare policy designed to create public healthcare has to shift resources out of private healthcare without triggering a crash. I'm not morally opposed to "gently caress insurance companies tomorrow."
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/shane_bauer/status/907253480489807872
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
I mean, lets be honest. If he he didn't kill Heather Heyer, that story would've been buried too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 04:39 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:I should hope so. All I'm saying is that healthcare policy designed to create public healthcare has to shift resources out of private healthcare without triggering a crash. I'm not morally opposed to "gently caress insurance companies tomorrow." I'm not convinced it would trigger a crash, is the thing. Would ending the health insurance industry in one fell swoop be equivalent to bursting a bubble? I'm actually not sure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2017 20:34
|
|