|
Condiv posted:tbh, i've never gotten a raise either. though i'm supposed to get one this year after working here for 3 years, so hopefully Sorry buddy. I have been outside of the US for 5+ years now, so I dunno maybe it's even worse now. At the same time, the US isn't the only economy in the world and there are a lot of factors going into any one employment or salary decision, and a single employment or salary decision is not the same as an overall economy.
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
Condiv posted:Here's a vox article interviewing GOP senators about their idiotic repeal attempts As always, Chuck Grassley eschews all of that blustery double talk and just says what he means: quote:Let me give you a political answer, and then I’ll give you a substance answer. "Well, we promised to do it for 8 years, and also states are better at things than the federal government". Never mind that the former is a terrible reason to do anything and the latter is definitely not true if your goal is to have people covered (see: number of states that rejected the medicaid expansion). Also, Johnny Isakson (R-GA) on learning how cause and effect works: "I'm from a state that didn't expand Medicaid, and the way we were going in health care looked like those states would actually be hurt worse than other states."
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Sorry buddy. I have been outside of the US for 5+ years now, so I dunno maybe it's even worse now. well, i'm working outside the US, but its for a part of the french government so low salaries and very rigid rules for who gets what salary, and when raises are handed out are in place. macron isn't making me feel safer in my job either, but then again my boss is trying to make a startup and have me work at that so maybe macron will love me instead Condiv fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Condiv posted:well, i'm working outside the US, but its for a part of the french government so low salaries and very rigid rules for who gets what salary, and when raises are handed out are in place. macron isn't making me feel safer in my job either, but then again my boss is trying to make a startup and have me work at that so maybe macron will love me instead Oh, that's right, you've mentioned that before. Macron seems dead set on turning France into 1980s USA, which is preferable to his opponent who wanted to turn France into 1930s Germany but still not good. What field are you in if you don't mind me asking? I'm looking for ways to be able to have more job options without having to go back to the USA. If I went to the USA I (assume that I) would be able to get a $50K+ job pretty quickly, but my skills are extremely US-Centric right now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/HoppyKercheval/status/910586875852869633 West Virginia politics is weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:Oh, that's right, you've mentioned that before. Macron seems dead set on turning France into 1980s USA, which is preferable to his opponent who wanted to turn France into 1930s Germany but still not good. What field are you in if you don't mind me asking? I'm looking for ways to be able to have more job options without having to go back to the USA. If I went to the USA I (assume that I) would be able to get a $50K+ job pretty quickly, but my skills are extremely US-Centric right now. computer science, currently working in bioinformatics supporting biologists. in the US i might be able to get $60k+ (my brother is definitely making more than me despite him just having exited university), but that's just in theory. in all likelihood i'd be making more than i make right now though
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
I figured I'd come and if nothing else lurk a bit for the latest bi-monthly mad scramble attempt to repeal Obamacare with seemingly no replacement since that's apparently how a government is supposed to function in the midst of domestic and international crisis and because these U.S Politics threads seem to hit their stride during these hand wringer type events. What probably innocuous if kind of dumb posts are you people getting righteously indignant and flinging extreme labels onto other posters about at the moment by the way? It's seems like public thread enemy #1 changes sometimes by the hour so it can be hard to keep track of sometimes. Also is there a designated poster to just get utterly dumped on as people take their frustrations out should the bill makes it's way through the Senate yet? Lastly will there be deep twitter analysis of random rear end in a top hat's lovely hot take commentary for re-tweets numbering in the dozens involved and the re-acknowledgement that yes indeed people hold or at least claim to hold lovely views on a daily basis on and for the internet? I certainly expect all bases to be covered here. It should be quite a ride in any case much like last time and the time before and the time before that with heroes and villains and backstabbing and last minute vote changes that'll again make House of Cards look tame. Will probably start actively following the process on Monday which is when I assume the big push will come since Reconciliation expires next Sunday. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Kale posted:I figured I'd come and if nothing else lurk a bit for the latest bi-monthly mad scramble attempt to repeal Obamacare with seemingly no replacement since that's apparently how a government is supposed to function in the midst of domestic and international crisis and because these U.S Politics threads seem to hit their stride during these hand wringer type events. What probably innocuous if kind of dumb posts are you people getting righteously indignant and flinging extreme labels onto other posters about at the moment by the way? It's seems like public thread enemy #1 changes sometimes by the hour so it can be hard to keep track of sometimes. Also is there a designated poster to just get utterly dumped on as people take their frustrations out should the bill makes it's way through the Senate yet? Lastly will there be deep twitter analysis of random rear end in a top hat's lovely hot take commentary for re-tweets numbering in the dozens involved and the re-acknowledgement that yes indeed people hold or at least claim to hold lovely views on a daily basis on and for the internet? I certainly expect all bases to be covered here. You'll never stop getting ragged on if you keep making these shitposts
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:
Wouldn't leaving it entirely up to the states facilitate a massive brain drain into the few states that actually set something decent up? Or, is that the point? Why??
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Haha Kale shut the gently caress up. Also not gonna lie I'm not happy that Democrats are stupid enough to keep making deals with Republicans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Kale posted:I figured I'd come and if nothing else lurk a bit for the latest bi-monthly mad scramble attempt to repeal Obamacare with seemingly no replacement since that's apparently how a government is supposed to function in the midst of domestic and international crisis and because these U.S Politics threads seem to hit their stride during these hand wringer type events. What probably innocuous if kind of dumb posts are you people getting righteously indignant and flinging extreme labels onto other posters about at the moment by the way? It's seems like public thread enemy #1 changes sometimes by the hour so it can be hard to keep track of sometimes. Also is there a designated poster to just get utterly dumped on as people take their frustrations out should the bill makes it's way through the Senate yet? Lastly will there be deep twitter analysis of random rear end in a top hat's lovely hot take commentary for re-tweets numbering in the dozens involved and the re-acknowledgement that yes indeed people hold or at least claim to hold lovely views on a daily basis on and for the internet? I certainly expect all bases to be covered here. sir this is an arbys
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 20:59
|
|
|
Tarezax posted:You'll never stop getting ragged on if you keep making these shitposts Negative attention is still attention.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Power Walrus posted:Wouldn't leaving it entirely up to the states facilitate a massive brain drain into the few states that actually set something decent up? Or, is that the point? Why?? "poo poo what's in this bill? gently caress it gotta pass somethin"
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Haha Kale shut the gently caress up.  especially in this case cause it'd give ammunition to republicans saying "we need to fix obamacare! (by slashing it to pieces!)"
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
*walks into thread wearing giant sandwich board reading "KICK ME"* I don't understand why people keep kicking me!
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
Can I ask a potentially naive political question? It seems like many of the worst provisions of Graham-Cassidy don't kick in for years, not til 2026. Doesn't that imply the Republicans have to unilaterally hold power til then? If the Dems win in, say, 2020, can't they just pass the gently caress Graham-Cassidy Bill that undoes everything it says is supposed to happen later? (not to diminish that there are harmful aspects that will kick in a lot sooner; I'm just talking about the down-the-road aspects).
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Tarezax posted:You'll never stop getting ragged on if you keep making these shitposts Which is why I plan on having an extremely limited presence anyway because depending on the way the wind is blowing anything and everything can be bad posting. It's no secret how I kind of see these threads as being more interested in making GBS threads on other posters the second the opportunity presents itself than actually D&D but they are capable of generating some good material and discussions on occasion. If it's not me it's somebody else anyway so it's like whatever, you just try not to give people the opportunity and hope for the best. Anyway yes if I keep posting people are just going to reaction post whatever I say instead of following and discussing the actual important issues, I'm well aware of that much. Anyway I hope it doesn't pass but it's not like I can do much about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Power Walrus posted:Wouldn't leaving it entirely up to the states facilitate a massive brain drain into the few states that actually set something decent up? Or, is that the point? Why?? that's probably tempered by the fact that the states most likely to set something up are gonna be losing the most federal money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Condiv posted:
At this point making a deal with Republicans on Obamacare only implies either bad faith or stupidity. They're utterly contemptible and malicious actors.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Haha Kale shut the gently caress up. The deal that they totally made and actually happened, not something that was in the discussion stages at all
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:The deal that they totally made and actually happened, not something that was in the discussion stages at all they shouldn't be discussing dumb things like that with republicans though?  edit: schumer's spokeperson didn't make it sound like he was averse to the bipartisan compromises either Condiv fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
Condiv posted:they shouldn't be discussing dumb things like that with republicans though? Yeah like lmao at any Congressional Democrats who want to make a deal with Republicans in tyool 2017 on healthcare of all things.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
Condiv posted:they shouldn't be discussing dumb things like that with republicans though? Republicans did it all the time with Dems right before they torpedoed poo poo. Let's you talk about bipartisanship which is still a word a lot of American think is really good. I think they're overestimating how much that actually matters to people who aren't already in the Democratic camp, but that's clearly what Schumer was trying to pull there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:12
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:At this point making a deal with Republicans on Obamacare only implies either bad faith or stupidity. They're utterly contemptible and malicious actors. If deal good, support deal If deal bad, do not support deal I don't really have a problem with Dem congressfolk trying to eg get a minor but important fix done even if it ultimately gets torpedoed by yet another attempt to kill hundreds of thousands of people Deal under discussion looked fine as I remember it and would, you know, keep Trump from waking up on the wrong side of Ivanka and burning the insurance industry to the ground by withholding cost sharing
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
Condiv posted:they shouldn't be discussing dumb things like that with republicans though? In negotiations, you often put things on the table at some point that you do not ever intend to actually give for lots of reasons? Something being floated in a give and take means nothing at all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:If deal good, support deal What magical unicorn land do you hail from where Congressional Republicans make good deals?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
I think the concessions made in the bipartisan talks were meant as a signal of ostensible good faith to Murkowski/McCain, to give them the sense that there was something to come back to should Graham-Cassidy fail. Those negotiations are dead now, but could be brought back later. The Collins-Nelson talks are probably a signal along the same lines. Pretty sure the idea is to call McConnell's bluff that Graham-Cassidy will be the last word on this. Remains to be seen if Murkowski/McCain actually want bipartisan talks enough to hurt their party's feelings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
TGLT posted:Republicans did it all the time with Dems right before they torpedoed poo poo. Let's you talk about bipartisanship which is still a word a lot of American think is really good. I think they're overestimating how much that actually matters to people who aren't already in the Democratic camp, but that's clearly what Schumer was trying to pull there. i mean, that strategy is obvious, but unflinching bipartisanship didn't net the dems wins for a long time so I dunno why they are trying to pull it right now when they have the wind at their backs and absolutely no-one wants republicans loving up obamacare GreyjoyBastard posted:If deal good, support deal what do bronze plans and more waivers for states do to fix ppaca?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:In negotiations, you often put things on the table at some point that you do not ever intend to actually give for lots of reasons? uh no you don't. in negotiation you start at a position you don't expect to be able to reach and then give up on things you don't actually care about. copper plans and more waivers are not something that dems should concede on Condiv fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Sep 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Who wants another "Get incredibly mad at rich people" series of interviews with "Holy poo poo, how can you think that?" quotes? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/08/opinion/sunday/what-the-rich-wont-tell-you.html#story-continues-1 quote:My interviewees never talked about themselves as “rich” or “upper class,” often preferring terms like “comfortable” or “fortunate.” Some even identified as “middle class” or “in the middle,” typically comparing themselves with the super-wealthy, who are especially prominent in New York City, rather than to those with less. I interviewed 50 parents with children at home, including 18 stay-at-home mothers. Highly educated, they worked or had worked in finance and related industries, or had inherited assets in the tens of millions of dollars. quote:When I used the word “affluent” in an email to a stay-at-home mom with a $2.5 million household income, a house in the Hamptons and a child in private school, she almost canceled the interview, she told me later. Real affluence, she said, belonged to her friends who traveled on a private plane. quote:An interior designer I spoke with told me his wealthy clients also hid prices, saying that expensive furniture and other items arrive at their houses “with big price tags on them” that “have to be removed, or Sharpied over, so the housekeepers and staff don’t see them.” quote:The stigma of wealth showed up in my interviews first in literal silences about money. When I asked one very wealthy stay-at-home mother what her family’s assets were, she was taken aback. “No one’s ever asked me that, honestly,” she said. “No one asks that question. It’s up there with, like, ‘Do you masturbate?’ ” quote:These conflicts often extended to a deep discomfort with displaying wealth. Scott, who had inherited wealth of more than $50 million, told me he and his wife were ambivalent about the Manhattan apartment they had recently bought for over $4 million.Asked why, he responded: “Do we want to live in such a fancy place? Do we want to deal with the person coming in and being like, ‘Wow!’ That wears on you. We’re just not the type of people who wear it on our sleeve. We don’t want that ‘Wow.’ ” His wife, whom I interviewed separately, was so uneasy with the fact that they lived in a penthouse that she had asked the post office to change their mailing address so that it would include the floor number instead of “PH,” a term she found “elite and snobby.” quote:It is not surprising, then, that the people I talked with wanted to distance themselves from the increasingly vilified category of the 1 percent. But their unease with acknowledging their privilege also grows out of a decades-long shift in the composition of the wealthy. "We are also part of the 99% and we get lumped in with the actual 1% and attacked," said one woman whose income last year was $273,000. quote:Talia was a stay-at-home mom whose husband worked in finance and earned about $500,000 per year. They were combining two apartments in a renovation, and they rented a country home. “We have a pretty normal existence,” she told me. When I asked what that meant, she responded: “I don’t know. Like, dinners at home with the family. The kids eat, we give them their bath, we read stories.” It wasn’t as if she was dining out at four-star restaurants every night, she said. “We walk to school every morning. And, you know, it’s fun. It’s a real neighborhood existence.” quote:Scott and his wife had spent $600,000 in the year before our conversation. “We just can’t understand how we spent that much money,” he told me. “That’s kind of a little spousal joke. You know, like: ‘Hey. Do you feel like this is the $600,000 lifestyle? Whooo!’ ” Rather than living the high life that he imagined would carry such a price tag, he described himself as “frenetic,” asserting, “I’m running around, I’m making peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.”
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:What magical unicorn land do you hail from where Congressional Republicans make good deals? I would prefer that Dems offer something reasonable that then either gets rejected (and can be used to hurt Republicans) or gets accepted (and is better than the status quo) In this particular case, I would not have been happy with a lot of possible waiver propositions but might have been grudgingly okay with the existence of copper plans depending on details In exchange for cementing the continued existence of the ACA as a thing
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Z. Autobahn posted:Can I ask a potentially naive political question? It seems like many of the worst provisions of Graham-Cassidy don't kick in for years, not til 2026. Doesn't that imply the Republicans have to unilaterally hold power til then? If the Dems win in, say, 2020, can't they just pass the gently caress Graham-Cassidy Bill that undoes everything it says is supposed to happen later? The Democrats are not going to take back the presidency, the senate, and the house by 2026, and if the Republicans have any control over any of those, they will torpedo the gently caress Graham-Cassidy bill.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Grammarchist posted:I think the concessions made in the bipartisan talks were meant as a signal of ostensible good faith to Murkowski/McCain, to give them the sense that there was something to come back to should Graham-Cassidy fail. Those negotiations are dead now, but could be brought back later. The Collins-Nelson talks are probably a signal along the same lines. how many times are the dems going to show good faith to republicans only to get stabbed in the back by them?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I would prefer that Dems offer something reasonable that then either gets rejected (and can be used to hurt Republicans) or gets accepted (and is better than the status quo) Ok, but what about the people who would be hurt by those changes? The impression this strategy gives is that the Democrats will sell out minorities and the poor at the negotiating table, to me, if they could get a deal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Condiv posted:how many times are the dems going to show good faith to republicans only to get stabbed in the back by them? what was the negative outcome of this vs not extending an olive branch?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
Condiv posted:uh no you don't. in negotiation you start at a position you don't expect to be able to reach and then give up on things you don't actually care about. bronze plans and more waivers are not something that dems should concede on You're assuming they wanted to actually reach an agreement, or that this wasn't part of a list of random ideas they sent out to make what they really wanted them to pick to sound more reasonable, or or or There's no indication that this was a serious concession given in full faith, and adding it to the pile of EVIDENCE is real dumb
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:I would prefer that Dems offer something reasonable that then either gets rejected (and can be used to hurt Republicans) or gets accepted (and is better than the status quo) problem is, concessions like these will not cement the continued existence of ppaca
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:what was the negative outcome of this vs not extending an olive branch? Getting Republican stank on your olive branch?
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
Condiv posted:i mean, that strategy is obvious, but unflinching bipartisanship didn't net the dems wins for a long time so I dunno why they are trying to pull it right now when they have the wind at their backs and absolutely no-one wants republicans loving up obamacare As Grammarchist pointed out, they need McCain and Murkowski to stand strong to actually win here. McCain, with brain cancer, drove all the way across country to defend the honor of The Proper Way To Do Things in the most dramatic way he could. This poo poo apparently animates his antediluvian body to elbow drop McConnell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Ok, but what about the people who would be hurt by those changes? what about the people who would be hurt by Donald Trump unilaterally collapsing the ACA market? the central thing being sought is turning cost sharing subsidies from "may issue" to "shall issue" I would humbly submit that giving Donald discretion here is bad
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2017 21:23
|
|