|
John Wick of Dogs posted:They passed the bill through reconciliation. They didn't need him That is an over-simplification to the point of being misleading. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_health_insurance_option quote:The public health insurance option, also known as the public insurance option or the public option, is a proposal to create a government-run health insurance agency that would compete with other private health insurance companies within the United States. The public option is not the same as publicly funded health care, but was proposed as an alternative health insurance plan offered by the government. The public option was initially proposed for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, but was removed after Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) threatened a filibuster.[1][2] Sen. Bernard Sanders (I-VT), in opposition to Sen. Lieberman, further threatened to vote against the bill without a public option,[3] but agreed to vote for it once expansions in Medicaid and Community Health Clinic funding were amended to the bill.[4] Subsequently, the Obama White House did not include the public option[5] into the bill passed under reconciliation. The public option would later be supported by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party during the 2016 election, and by multiple Democratic candidates during the 2020 election. [6][7]
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Dietrich posted:I followed the development of the ACA very closely, I'm 100% aware of that. There were endless negotiations with the GOP, and many concessions to attempt to get bipartisan support for it. Every time the Dems gave something, the goal posts moved for what it would take to get bipartisan support. It took too long to realize the depth of the bad faith from the GOP side. Those were the failures of the Obama administration. let's spend the next 100 years going over why the ACA was actually good. i'm sure that this time the conversation will reveal the real truth and the ACA will finally be recognized as unequivocally Good And Cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:32
|
|
|
Sampatrick posted:This is actually exactly why Obama will never endorse Bernie unless he's already the nominee; Bernie is a direct threat to Obama's legacy based on the central plank of his campaign being M4A. They'll care it Obamacare+.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
Phone posted:let's spend the next 100 years going over why the ACA was actually good. i'm sure that this time the conversation will reveal the real truth and the ACA will finally be recognized as unequivocally Good And Cool. I was saying that the ACA was not what Obama wanted to deliver but the result of over-compromise with the GOP who were operating in bad-faith and the lack of support from Blue Dog senators, as an argument against the idea that Obama would literally rat-gently caress his own party in order to prevent a president supporting Medicare For All from getting the nomination. Clearly this means I think the ACA is good and cool...
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:35
|
|
|
Phone posted:let's spend the next 100 years going over why the ACA was actually good. i'm sure that this time the conversation will reveal the real truth and the ACA will finally be recognized as unequivocally Good And Cool. I don't think anyone things the ACA was "good." I suggested Obama will endorse the delegate leader going into the convention, and some people disagreed and so we got into a discussion about the ACA as a window into Obama's soul. Personally I don't think you need to believe Obama is "good" to think he'll endorse Sanders if he's going into the convention with a 10% delegate lead but less than 50%. I think it's in the interest of Obama preserving his legacy to prevent the Democratic party from fracturing for a generation. A self interested Obama will endorse Bernie because even if he's not more moral than the mainstream DNC hacks, he's definitely smarter than they are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:37
|
|
|
Phone posted:let's spend the next 100 years going over why the ACA was actually good. i'm sure that this time the conversation will reveal the real truth and the ACA will finally be recognized as unequivocally Good And Cool. If people stopped trying to use it to say how bad Obama was because they don't actually remember how it got passed then others wouldn't have to come in and correct them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:38
|
|
|
Sanders is a repudiation of Obama's legacy and is the final nail in its coffin after Trump's victory. I agree Obama won't try to gently caress over Sanders but it's more because he doesn't care. If he cared about jack or poo poo he'd have been publicly speaking out against Trump constantly. He's ultrarich now and doesn't give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:They'll care it Obamacare+. Should just call it Semashcare after the Soviet Semashko system, that could cause a few chuds to stroke out
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:40
|
|
|
The only conservatives still obsessed with the Soviet Union are DemocratsGroovelord Neato posted:Sanders is a repudiation of Obama's legacy and is the final nail in its coffin after Trump's victory. I agree Obama won't try to gently caress over Sanders but it's more because he doesn't care. If he cared about jack or poo poo he'd have been publicly speaking out against Trump constantly. He's ultrarich now and doesn't give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:43
|
|
|
Hellblazer187 posted:I don't think anyone things the ACA was "good." I suggested Obama will endorse the delegate leader going into the convention, and some people disagreed and so we got into a discussion about the ACA as a window into Obama's soul. Personally I don't think you need to believe Obama is "good" to think he'll endorse Sanders if he's going into the convention with a 10% delegate lead but less than 50%. I think it's in the interest of Obama preserving his legacy to prevent the Democratic party from fracturing for a generation. A self interested Obama will endorse Bernie because even if he's not more moral than the mainstream DNC hacks, he's definitely smarter than they are. so your argument is that obama is playing 11th dimensional chess and that installing tom perez as the dnc chair was all a part of a plan for a last minute heel turn in order to secure his legacy and save the democratic party from itself by endorsing bernie? all according to keikaku, i suppose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Sanders is a repudiation of Obama's legacy and is the final nail in its coffin after Trump's victory. I agree Obama won't try to gently caress over Sanders but it's more because he doesn't care. If he cared about jack or poo poo he'd have been publicly speaking out against Trump constantly. He's ultrarich now and doesn't give a gently caress. Sanders is a repudiation of Clinton's legacy, not Obama's.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
Dietrich posted:Sanders is a repudiation of Clinton's legacy, not Obama's. How do you figure, sports fan? (Obama is just a continuation of Clinton, to be clear.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:45
|
|
|
There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; "Bernie Sanders said at the debate last night that he wants minimum wage to be $15 per hour. 15$ X 40 hr week = $600 600$ X 52 weeks per yr = $31,200 Bernie Sanders wants free health care for all and was asked how he would pay for it. His answer was raise taxes to 52% on anybody making over $29,000 per year. 52% of $31,200 = $16,224 in tax $31,200 - $16,224 = $14,976 is your pay $14,976 ÷ 52 weeks = $288 per week $288 ÷ 40 hr week = $7.20 per hour" I didn't catch the debate, I don't live in America anymore, and I'm not a tax expert, but did he actually say anything about this? I get that it's completely ignoring tax brackets but I couldn't find anything other than super right stuff bitching about it and anything else about his tax plan puts people making that little paying way less in taxes than 52% on that higher income. But I'm not gonna call people out on it when I am just googling for five minutes before bed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:47
|
|
|
Phone posted:so your argument is that obama is playing 11th dimensional chess and that installing tom perez as the dnc chair was all a part of a plan for a last minute heel turn in order to secure his legacy and save the democratic party from itself by endorsing bernie? This is the dumbest possible read of what I was saying. I'm not saying Obama wants or ever wanted Sanders. He's just smart enough to see the writing on the wall. The options currently are Sanders is the nominee or the Democratic party is dust for a generation. Obama didn't want those to be the two options, but those are the two options right now. Obama has a great deal of power, given his influence, to decide which of those options happen. It's in his self interest, as things stand today, to make the first one be what happens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:49
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:I didn't catch the debate, I don't live in America anymore, and I'm not a tax expert, but did he actually say anything about this? I get that it's completely ignoring tax brackets but I couldn't find anything other than super right stuff bitching about it and anything else about his tax plan puts people making that little paying way less in taxes than 52% on that higher income. But I'm not gonna call people out on it when I am just googling for five minutes before bed. That's all it is. Also not everyone making minimum wage is working full time. Here's a calculator of how much money people will save under M4A compared to their current health insurance: https://www.bernietax.com/
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; No and that's not how taxes work at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; No one ever considers tax rates to work backwards to your "actual" hourly wage and doing it in this one particular instance is insane. Also Bernie is not going to raise any poor person's taxes to 52% and that math is 1000% not how taxes work at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; FLAT TAX! FLAT TAX! FLAT TAX! 31200-29000 = 2200 52% of 2200 = 1144 31200-1144 = 30056 30056 / 52 = 578 per week 578/40 hr week = 14.45 per hour
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:How do you figure, sports fan? (Obama is just a continuation of Clinton, to be clear.) Obama was hampered by Clinton's legacy, which in my estimation includes Clinton's failure to nip Gingrich's brand of partisan politics in the bud and a failure to move the coalition won via third-way politics leftward and away from Reaganomics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
You can go back and say Sanders is a repudiation of the entire Democratic Party from Carter onward.BrainDance posted:I didn't catch the debate, I don't live in America anymore, and I'm not a tax expert, but did he actually say anything about this? I get that it's completely ignoring tax brackets but I couldn't find anything other than super right stuff bitching about it and anything else about his tax plan puts people making that little paying way less in taxes than 52% on that higher income. But I'm not gonna call people out on it when I am just googling for five minutes before bed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
Phone posted:FLAT TAX! FLAT TAX! FLAT TAX! Where is this 52% number coming from, last i checked it was a 4% flat tax on income about 29k.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
Dietrich posted:Obama was hampered by Clinton's legacy, which in my estimation includes Clinton's failure to nip Gingrich's brand of partisan politics in the bud and a failure to move the coalition won via third-way politics leftward and away from Reaganomics. Obama put or kept Clinton's (or Bush;s) guys into administration positions to deal with the aftermath of a crisis they either caused or allowed to happen. You only need two words to prove Obama didn't give a poo poo about making things better: Larry Summers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:I get that it's completely ignoring tax brackets You answered yourself
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
Edit: wrong link
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Where is this 52% number coming from, last i checked it was a 4% flat tax on income about 29k. it was a part of the original conceit of "bernard sanders wants to tax everyone making 29k at 52%" i was chanting FLAT TAX! because of all of the dipshits who want a flat tax and can't do the bare minimum to understand progressive tax brackets e: just to make sure everyone is on the same page, here's the math that i did 0% tax rate between 0 and 29k 52% tax rate over 29k
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
Yeah the 52% is made up garbage and even if it was true it wouldn't have the result that you described, the amount of crazy to even think that's how things work from whatever source you pulled it from is honestly impressive.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:54
|
|
|
dex_sda posted:You answered yourself Well, I suspected there was more to it even than that. Because I can only find the 52% number in anything Bernie's put out.... on income above 10 million. But since I did not see the debate I didn't know what the misunderstood quote was or if it was just completely made up from nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:55
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:That's all it is. Also not everyone making minimum wage is working full time. It actually took me playing with this to realise how generous Bernie's proposal is. If you're paying $10k pa on healthcare then a single person would be better off unless they were making nearly 300k
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:56
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; The part about 52% income tax is complete fiction, with no basis in anything Bernie has said. It was chosen to make the rest of the post work so they can say that minimum wage will actually stay the same. Besides, income tax is marginal. Households pay X.xx% tax on the income they make above $XX,000, not on the households entire income.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Phone posted:let's spend the next 100 years going over why the ACA was actually good. i'm sure that this time the conversation will reveal the real truth and the ACA will finally be recognized as unequivocally Good And Cool. Getting rid of denial for pre existing conditions saved my partners life, and many others. You’re a fool or very young if you don’t remember the insurance landscape before it. It was much much worse. It wasn’t perfect, and we need Medicare for all now, but your take is terrible and inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
People don't understand progressive taxation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:It actually took me playing with this to realise how generous Bernie's proposal is. If you're paying $10k pa on healthcare then a single person would be better off unless they were making nearly 300k The last I'd checked (and this was during the 2016 primary) 96 percent of Americans would save money under M4A. I'm not rich by any means but I'm in the top 10 percent of earners and I'd save 1200 bucks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this; Sanders has said no such thing, so it's a lie on its face. You can read the details of his plan on his Senate website, but I will post the important parts here. https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/options-to-finance-medicare-for-all?inline=file Bernie Sanders posted:4 percent income-based premium paid by households It also leaves out that the standard deduction is $12,000 for a single person and $24000 for a married couple, which brings the taxable income below the $29000 threshold for paying the Medicare for All premium.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:Well, I suspected there was more to it even than that. Because I can only find the 52% number in anything Bernie's put out.... on income above 10 million. But since I did not see the debate I didn't know what the misunderstood quote was or if it was just completely made up from nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
I've been looking at RealClearPolitics current polls to figure out what a possible Bernie vs Trump EC win could look like based on current polling. Any state that is in the tossup category but all the polls are all lean Trump but albeit small margins (AZ) I put as lean Republican. As long as there are some Sanders polls or are very close I put it lean Dem so long as it isn't impossible, I'm not an expert so this might be improbable in an actual GE scenario. Map:  WI seems gone. AZ I've seen people claim is winnable but none of the polling seems to back that up as of yet. Bernie otherwise seems to be polling decently enough in PA, MI and even OH. Same with NC. Georgia is weirdly swingy with Trump +10 in one poll and Bernie between +3 and +4 in others and Trump +1 recently. It feels like it's more of a swing state then some other states. Texas is very close, Trump +4, but probably not close enough and needs another 10 years for demographics to really continue to swing. Florida is basically extremely close with plenty of +Sanders polls even if the margins are small. With felon re-enfranchisement and and refugees from PR maybe this can swing Dem? But the voter suppression efforts might make it fail to meet the mark. PA which is the most important state for Dems to win, seems solidly lean Sanders. So I have hopes but in the base map where PA, NC, WI, AZ, and FL are tossups its still a very nervous map. Sanders/Dems need to carry PA and then at least one other formerly red state or Ohio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
hanales posted:Getting rid of denial for pre existing conditions saved my partners life, and many others. You’re a fool or very young if you don’t remember the insurance landscape before it. It was much much worse. The other thing that gets forgotten here is how the Supreme Court did neuter it. If the Medicaid expansion actually went through nationwide, as intended, it would have helped a lot more people. Poor people in the states that accepted Medicaid expansion are muuuuch better off than they were pre ACA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:00
|
|
|
BrainDance posted:There's this meme going around that seemed to pop up yesterday that goes like this;  Imagine taking the time to write this whole thing out and never for even a second thinking 'surely I've got to be doing something really dumb here'
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:01
|
|
|
twice burned ice posted:
No need to be a dick, dude pretty much straight up said he knew it was wrong in the op
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:Obama put or kept Clinton's (or Bush;s) guys into administration positions to deal with the aftermath of a crisis they either caused or allowed to happen. It's almost as if Obama's 2008 message was one of reconciliation after the insanity of Bush's second term, and he was attempting to make overtures towards moderate republicans he thought he could work with as a way of building a bipartisan movement for evidence based policy that no one could argue against from a factual basis. I feel like I'm on crazy pills with how you guys interpret 2009-2011. Obama failed to get a lot of poo poo done. Sure. We can agree on that. But his failure was from a point of wonky mis-understanding of what motivates the body politic to support things, not because he was a crypto-right-winger who secretly longed for the halcyon days of Operation Desert Storm.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Not going after the brazenly criminal Bush administration was stupid even then. His admin also tried to drown or at least water down the torture report (and succeeded). Not going after the bankers was dumb as poo poo. Bringing in the people that destroyed the economy was obviously stupid at the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2020 16:04
|
|