POLITICAL THREAD

[AustinTXCat]

What? I thought baby boomers represented the ultimate evil.

There’s a theory that stingy millennials are to blame for the sluggish economy.

Millennials — the selfie obsessed, avocado toast-loving generation — might be behind slower economic growth, according to a research note last week from Raymond James......

 

[anon_l8pbkn96tg3j6]

The Morey drama is amazing. Money is a hell of a drug.

 

[CrittendenWildcat]

What? I thought baby boomers represented the ultimate evil.

There’s a theory that stingy millennials are to blame for the sluggish economy.

Millennials — the selfie obsessed, avocado toast-loving generation — might be behind slower economic growth, according to a research note last week from Raymond James......

C'mon. You can't throw them under the bus for saving more money and not being as materialistic as prior generations. An economy dependent on negative saving rates and rampant vapid materialistic consumption is just not sustainable.

 

[Sawnee Cat]

IMO, Trump is Trump. He's not a politician. He does not know political propriety. He doesn't know how to play by their rules. He just does what he does. Apparently career pols know how to do the same type things without getting caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
hillary colluding with foreign countries to defeat Trump. Biden's involvement with Ukraine etc... They are more polished and have the skills to circumvent suspicion. At least until now. I like Trump because at least he will say what he's thinking.

And polished politicians have the media. They cover it up or do not report it. Trump's biggest sin is being an outsider. The Swamp and establishment hate outsiders that throw a monkey wrench into their domain.

 

[JumperJack]

The Morey drama is amazing. Money is a hell of a drug.

We’re seeing the end of the line. We have American corporations betraying our ideals before the most murderous regime in history, for the sake of money.

We’re finding out that many people in this country believe in nothing bigger than themselves. Depressing to say the least.

Imagine in the 1930’s the Yankees or Dodgers scraping and bowing before Hitler to sustain some business deal.

 

[Platinumdrgn]

What? I thought baby boomers represented the ultimate evil.

There’s a theory that stingy millennials are to blame for the sluggish economy.

Millennials — the selfie obsessed, avocado toast-loving generation — might be behind slower economic growth, according to a research note last week from Raymond James......

newer generations understand that Boomers were ****ing idiots for creating and living off of a debt economy. Time to get back to only spending what you can actually afford.

 

[P19978]

I still eat PB&J sandwiches. I must be a racist.

If I leave off the jelly am I woke?

 

[TheFrontRunner]

 

[TheFrontRunner]

 

[screwduke1]

Umm...someone alert the Hill that Reagan is dead.

 

[screwduke1]

 

[P19978]

We're really pulling out of the middle East. Never thought I'd see the day. What an incredible move. I love the part of his tweet where he says let them sort it out.

Now of course all the usual suspects (msm and blue checks) are ripping out their beards screaming about leaving a war that they spent years blasting us for being in.

Support Israel but tell the rest of the ME to eff off and get us out.

Use the savings to boost US energy production and become completely energy independent.

Game over for the ME.

 

[AustinTXCat]

The right goes too far right on plenty of things too though, like denying climate change and bloated military spending to name a couple.

 

[Bill Cosby]

They caught them guys! They got the 6 trolls!

View embedded media

View embedded media

People forget all it took was one single arm wrestling meme to swing the entire election from Hilary Clinton to Orange Hitler.

No acid attack burns as hard as a spicy meme.

 

[Platinumdrgn]

Hahaha. Plat, back at it.

Never seen someone so wrong, so often.

And keep coming back.

'MASS GENOCIDE!!!!'

Hahahahhahahah.

With the US no longer cock blocking Erdogan 1 of 2 things will happen. 1) He will slaughter the Kurds. 2) The Kurds will broker a deal with Assad and start a new war. On top of the 100k+ people sitting in prison camps run by the Kurds which is mostly the wives and kids of dead ISIS fighters. Turkey also is going to shove 2million refugees in the middle as cannon fodder. So your talking 150k+ fatalities in a pretty short time frame, aka a genocide. I'm not saying its a terrible idea, let the ME idiots wipe each other out. But we can acknowledge that we are purposely letting this happen. Lindsey AssPirate Graham was raging this morning against it so i have to assume its at least slightly a good idea.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Haven’t really looked into this at all, but given platinums track record, we may very well have peace in the Middle East for the first time in a couple millennia.

 

[ram1955]

Support Israel but tell the rest of the ME to eff off and get us out.

Use the savings to boost US energy production and become completely energy independent.

Game over for the ME.

Simply let the rest of the ME know that if they even look at Israel the wrong way, we will create a series of new lakes out of what are now countries.

 

[ram1955]

Haven’t really looked into this at all, but given platinums track record, we may very well have peace in the Middle East for the first time in a couple millennia.

If so, it won't last long. There will NEVER be a human contrived, lasting peace in the ME.

 

[Bill Cosby]

If so, it won't last long. There will NEVER be a human contrived, lasting peace in the ME.

You would think, but have you ever seen how wrong Platinum is about everything?

 

[ukalumni00]

We'll be right back in the ME once Trump us out. Too much money to be made by a lot of people.

 

[KRJ1975]

Simply let the rest of the ME know that if they even look at Israel the wrong way, we will create a series of new lakes out of what are now countries.

Israel wouldn't need our help with that.

 

[P19978]

I should add that I "get" the argument that a weakened/lack of US presence in the ME creates unrest. In theory, "nature abhors a vacuum"... and the US withdrawal would/could give Russia, etc a chance to gain even greater influence.

I just don't believe the Commies will have any more long term success dealing with the Muzzies than we had... those people are simply not reasonable.

 

[rqarnold]

here's to nuttin... anyway

You are fine in most of your post until the final conclusion, which is why I say you've identified the problem but not the solution and why I don't accuse of being a complete idiot, just an ideologue without the humility to even entertain the possibility you might be wrong.

I am aware this is an excercise in futiltiy for you ideologues (differing opinions does not mean different ideology so you guys know), but it not lost on the thinking and fair minded who may pass by on the thread.

Less expense to your insurance costs also equates to less profit for the industry, less profit equates to less innovation which equates to lower quality of care. There's a reason why when you walk in to a hospital you look on the wall of names and they are 75% foreign, those are the best doctors in the world who emigrate from their countries homes(even rich ones) to pursue greater success here (financial or otherwise, career advancement). There are reasons why we are the best of the best and why are the innovators.

So you identify the problem and propose the simplest solution, since it works in Europe it should work here the same way! No, that's not how it works, you have to look at all variables, all realities and then given that you come to a conclusion. It's way more probable that you fix our system by proverbially patching the leaks then it is you socialize it, in which case you would likely not only end up lowering the quality of care here, but it would reverberate world wide since their hospitals nor universities are as rich as ours (which means capable of throwing money at research). We can figure out other ways to increase incentive to health vs incentive to profit like something like those Christian shared health pools that popped up after ACA. I don't know, I don't have the solutions to the complex problem. I just say your simple solution clearly won't work, until you show me proof that it will.

You can't just say Europeans are healthier because of socialized medicine without taking in to account the obvious realites that Europeans are far less obese (no, googling around for statistics that says they aren't doesn't mean anything). At no point do you ever consider anything other than taking your meds to be taking care of your health, essentially. Europeans walk everywhere, they still live in villages where you walk down to the open air market to by local organic foods for their meal while you are sitting there at your McDonald's drive thru on Nicholasville Rd with your thumb up your overweight arse. If they live in cities, they walk because driving is very expensive and a nuisance. I don't know where I got the statistic, but it was probably NPR or some liberal source back when ACA was being proposed, but if things were to go at the projected rates the cost of treating diabetes alone would consume the entirety of the discretionary budget by 2030 or whatever which is obviously unsustainable and wouldn't work.

You are being enlightened here but it could only ever work for yourself if you remove the blockers and blinders you have on your mind. Until then, yes you won't ever have a clue, sorry. Go move to the European countries you admire so much and you will see how it actually works in reality there and why middle class Americans could never actually survive losing 60-70% of income to some form of tax (which is what happens in reality yes, no amount of googling you could do replaces the experience you would have if you moved there). Go there and do it if you want it so bad and then maybe, just maybe you would understand the infinite reasons why things are different there, some better some worse.

I love it when people who clearly have "blockers and blinders" fitted to themselves accuse others of the same.

I guess in the end it comes down to if you believe that healthcare should be a basic human right or a source of profiteering.
You don't know the answers but you know what the answers are not.... It works in every other country in which it is used but it can't work here...sure dude. Tell me who the ideologue is here.

We have a system that is incentivized to keep you in the system. To keep you dependent upon its services, to keep you dependent upon its drugs. A system so expensive that only the very top of the economic spectrum could ever afford it without the socialized network that is healthcare insurance.

Yes, research would be slowed...so we won't know what we don't know. That's a small price to pay.

I don't necessarily want healthcare professionals who are motivated by how much can they make. Doctors have always been well paid. There is never enough. The man who earns $250K wants to earn $500K. If they earn $500K they want $750K...$1M...they always want more and they earn more by ordering more tests, scheduling more appointments...few are positioned to question their judgment.

Foreign doctors that come to the US are not necessarily that nation's best and brightest. The MD that finished last in his class can immigrate here just as easily as the MD who finished first. We see very few coming here from those European nations...they come from Pakistan, India, the Caribbean, Philippines and Mexico. Those 5 nations (yes i know the Caribbean isn't a nation) account for 60% of all foreign docs in the US. A large percentage of the remaining come from other middle eastern countries. Foreign docs make up 30% of all docs in the US... 10% in Germany... 27% in Sweden... 30% in the UK...so remind me how we are so different?

Coming from 3rd world countries it doesn't take much

 

[Mashburned]

Pelosi/clintons/obama/bush and all these career clowns worth hundreds of milions didn't get rich not going to war.

Trump is putting America's best interests first, which is screwing up the money for career politicians. It's beautiful.

Btw, did you know Biden is only worth 15 million. That mfer is poor as hell. I was kind of shocked to learn that. No wonder nobody likes him or takes him serious.

 

[Platinumdrgn]

The irony in Trump bragging about how great his socialist program is and lying about where the money is coming from to pay for it.

 

[Platinumdrgn]

 

[qwesley]

But we can acknowledge that we are purposely letting this happen.

So you want outrage based on what might happen but there is never a mention by you or our media on what Obama actually sat by and watched happen?

Despite your homophobic slur at Graham, at least he is consistent. Based on what we are seeing from people in the know, there likely are not assurances in this strategy to hold Turkey accountable. Hope they are wrong.

 

[qwesley]

I guess in the end it comes down to if you believe that healthcare should be a basic human right or a source of profiteering.

How do you in good conscious work for a profiteering healthcare company?

 

[bigblueinsanity]

I don't necessarily want healthcare professionals who are motivated by how much can they make.

News flash: everyone is motivated by how much they can make. It's literally why anyone goes to work. You can't remove it. All you can do is suppress it by suppressing financial gain. But by suppressing financial gain, you inherently suppress motivation altogether.

It's why capitalism is the most superior economic system in history.

 

[rqarnold]

This is pure lunacy. The government taking over the health insurance industry will not make things cheaper.


1. Promote HSA use
2. Allow individuals to deduct health insurance premiums rather than just companies and self employed
3. Allow insurance companies to compete across state lines
4. As a requirement of licensing medical professionals and practices, require them to post the price of their procedures and prevent them from charging different rates for cash, insured or government payer

Why not start with those 4 things that would take 5 pages of legislation rather than jumping to the federal government nationalizing the insurance industry?

Name one industry where federal government involvement has made things cheaper (and where the federal government hasn’t lost shit loads of taxpayer money like the post office).

Bill, people have to be able to fund their HSA. Most people don't even sufficiently fund their 401K and now they are going to fund their HSA too? And when they don't?
I hear people daily who can't handle their $500 medical deductible and now they are going to save to handle a $5000 or higher deductible?
End result...providers raise rates and cost shift to the paying. Instead of writing off $500 they will have to write off $5000 and recover that lost revenue from others.
You think about people who are in your economic situation and think that it's the norm when in fact it's far from it.
(Related: I've long said that one of the next coming major economic issues will be the millions who have not sufficiently saved for retirement. When people are 70 yrs old and have burned through all of their savings and only have Social Security...)

50% of people pay zero federal income tax. How does making health insurance premiums deductible benefit them?

I have no issue with insurance companies competing across state lines but it would make next to zero difference. To sell a policy in a geographic area you have to show that you have a sufficient network of participating physicians within a reasonable distance. BTW, like us most insurers do compete in all 50 states. Not all for the same business but they are there in some capacity. Insurance rates are about spreading risks and if rates are higher in Kentucky than in Tennessee that's because the risks are lower in TN. Adding the Ky population may lower rates for Ky but will raise them for Tn. In the end it is all a zero sum game and regardless what you do there will be winners and losers.

So you want government in healthcare...but just to do the things you want them to do?
But really...a third of insured healthcare claims come from ER visits. If you break a leg are you calling around for the doc that will fix it the cheapest? If your wife is diagnosed with cancer, you shopping around?

Lastly, 5% of people account for 50% of healthcare spending in any given year. There are many solutions that seem great while you're in that 95%...yet when you have a stroke or heart attack, diagnosed with cancer, etc...you see the problems.

 

[DwayneMeighan]

 

[DwayneMeighan]

Is It Ever OK for a President to Ask a Foreign Country to Investigate a Political Rival?
Sometimes, yes—which is why Donald Trump’s potential impeachment hinges on his motive in doing so.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/10/06/trump-ukraine-investigate-rival-229341

Here’s the big question on which the potential impeachment of President Donald Trump could turn: Is it ever appropriate for a U.S. president to ask a foreign government to investigate a political rival?

Democrats seem to assume the answer is no, that this kind of request could never be proper, given the implications for our electoral system. “Smoking gun” is what they say about Trump’s asking Ukraine to investigate Joe and Hunter Biden. Republicans, meanwhile, contend that it is perfectly normal, and justified, for Trump as president to ask the Ukrainians to look into potential corruption that involves Americans and could, in theory, affect U.S. relations with that country.

History shows that a president sometimes might be justified in asking a foreign country to investigate a political rival, including a former vice president. So, the mere fact of Trump’s request for an investigation into the Bidens, without considering the circumstances of the request, is not enough to impeach him.

In order to prove Trump abused his presidential powers to the point that he no longer can be trusted in exercising them—the constitutional standard for impeachment—Congress must establish Trump’s intent in making the request. Was it done in good faith, with U.S. foreign or domestic interests in mind, or in bad faith, merely for Trump’s personal and political benefit? To prove the latter, Congress can’t rely on Trump’s words alone; it must show that the charges of corruption against the Bidens are baseless and that Trump’s request to Ukraine is part of a pattern of bad faith demonstrating that the nation no longer can tolerate his incumbency.

How can Congress establish that Trump’s motive was nefarious? For starters, the House will need to show that the Biden allegations are so spurious as to be necessarily made in bad faith. That will open the impeachment inquiry to whatever contrary evidence Trump can muster, unavoidably making Biden a focus of the inquiry—something Democrats presumably would prefer to avoid.

 

[SomeDudeCRO]

I love it when people who clearly have "blockers and blinders" fitted to themselves accuse others of the same.

I guess in the end it comes down to if you believe that healthcare should be a basic human right or a source of profiteering.
You don't know the answers but you know what the answers are not.... It works in every other country in which it is used but it can't work here...sure dude. Tell me who the ideologue is here.

We have a system that is incentivized to keep you in the system. To keep you dependent upon its services, to keep you dependent upon its drugs. A system so expensive that only the very top of the economic spectrum could ever afford it without the socialized network that is healthcare insurance.

Yes, research would be slowed...so we won't know what we don't know. That's a small price to pay.

I don't necessarily want healthcare professionals who are motivated by how much can they make. Doctors have always been well paid. There is never enough. The man who earns $250K wants to earn $500K. If they earn $500K they want $750K...$1M...they always want more and they earn more by ordering more tests, scheduling more appointments...few are positioned to question their judgment.

Foreign doctors that come to the US are not necessarily that nation's best and brightest. The MD that finished last in his class can immigrate here just as easily as the MD who finished first. We see very few coming here from those European nations...they come from Pakistan, India, the Caribbean, Philippines and Mexico. Those 5 nations (yes i know the Caribbean isn't a nation) account for 60% of all foreign docs in the US. A large percentage of the remaining come from other middle eastern countries. Foreign docs make up 30% of all docs in the US... 10% in Germany... 27% in Sweden... 30% in the UK...so remind me how we are so different?

Coming from 3rd world countries it doesn't take much

No, what I wanted from you was could you provide some argument of genuine substance and the clear answer is that you cannot. There is absolutely nothing you typed which I am not already aware of, and by the way Pakistani medical schools are amoung the best in the world.

You are an ideologue, even when proven wrong by a theoretical medicaire for all you wouldn't admit it but deflect blame. There are answers to everything you suggest but I will not waste anymore time on you than I have and I could brainstorm better solutions, but no, worse care and less development in curing diseases is not a small price to pay. Not all doctors or researchers are motivated by the dollar, by the bottom line, but it is morally ok to you for you to be greedy and be motivated by such but not them. That, amoung other reasons, is why you are out of your league here, working for an HMO just narrows your perspective and enforces your misguided notions.



Here, maybe I'll just put the overall it into pictures and I'll leave it there as one last gasp attempt at doing the impossible (changing a stubborn fool's mind)

Here's how the average middle class European lives. A picture says a thousand words, and I could use a thousand thousand words to refute your shallow thinking.

Compared to typical American doing alright for himself..

The American has basically 2x of everything because he has more disposable income and he is responsible for himself, in health and other avenues.

Yes there are problems and yes medicaire for all would bring down costs as it already puts downward pressure on them, but in your hey look "I stayed at a holiday inn last night" expertise, you leftists don't realize that there is no free economic lunch and you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You naively think you'll just reap the rewards of taking money from greedy doctors and the Skirelli's of the world, no you won't and there are other more logical and rational ways to control costs should politicians decide to to do so without being corrupted by lobbyists or whatever else. Again, congratulations on identifying the problem but you get no rewards for proposing bad solutions.

 

[TheFrontRunner]

 

[qwesley]

And the incestuous propaganda beat goes on. For about a week now when I start Netflix I get a bleeding heart doc series on living undocumented in mean old America but this here is another level of ugottabeshittingme.

 

[Bill Cosby]

Bill, people have to be able to fund their HSA. Most people don't even sufficiently fund their 401K and now they are going to fund their HSA too? And when they don't?
I hear people daily who can't handle their $500 medical deductible and now they are going to save to handle a $5000 or higher deductible?
End result...providers raise rates and cost shift to the paying. Instead of writing off $500 they will have to write off $5000 and recover that lost revenue from others.
You think about people who are in your economic situation and think that it's the norm when in fact it's far from it.
(Related: I've long said that one of the next coming major economic issues will be the millions who have not sufficiently saved for retirement. When people are 70 yrs old and have burned through all of their savings and only have Social Security...)

50% of people pay zero federal income tax. How does making health insurance premiums deductible benefit them?

I have no issue with insurance companies competing across state lines but it would make next to zero difference. To sell a policy in a geographic area you have to show that you have a sufficient network of participating physicians within a reasonable distance. BTW, like us most insurers do compete in all 50 states. Not all for the same business but they are there in some capacity. Insurance rates are about spreading risks and if rates are higher in Kentucky than in Tennessee that's because the risks are lower in TN. Adding the Ky population may lower rates for Ky but will raise them for Tn. In the end it is all a zero sum game and regardless what you do there will be winners and losers.

So you want government in healthcare...but just to do the things you want them to do?
But really...a third of insured healthcare claims come from ER visits. If you break a leg are you calling around for the doc that will fix it the cheapest? If your wife is diagnosed with cancer, you shopping around?

Lastly, 5% of people account for 50% of healthcare spending in any given year. There are many solutions that seem great while you're in that 95%...yet when you have a stroke or heart attack, diagnosed with cancer, etc...you see the problems.

We just have two fundamentally different views on the world that can’t be reconciled.

I feel the government should only be involved as a safety net. If you’re irresponsible and choose to buy a new Lexus you can’t afford rather than contributing to retirement or an HSA, that’s on you.

Health care is not a right. Your rights end the minute they require someone else to do something against their will. Free speech. The right to keep and bear arms. The right of protection against unlawful searches and seizures. Etc. Not the right to force someone to provide a service to you, healthcare or otherwise.

If we moved to an individual based health insurance system, it would follow individual compensation would increase by the amount employers are already paying for that employees health insurance. It’s currently deductible in the sense that it’s not included in employee comp. point being the employee will now have freedom and choice to shop around, and the net tax impact is zero.

The whole point would be to transition to a system where people pay for maintenance and have catastrophic policies.

I have zero faith in our federal government. I think I asked before, but please point me in the direction of the federal government operating in an industry and doing it better and cheaper than the market. Healthcare will be no different. Costs will go up. Quality will fall.

And yes, if my wife is diagnosed with cancer and I can read informed reviews of treatments and costs online, I sure as shit am shopping around. I’d much prefer we make an informed decision rather than being beholden to a network or certain providers and covered treatments.

 

[Joerules19]

It will greatly help wages for good teachers. They get held back having to carry all the worthless teachers who are nearly impossible to fire. And there are plenty of the latter that everyone wants rid of

Personally, I do agree that there are plenty of bad teachers (just like their are bad doctors, lawyers, nurses, accountants, etc.) and the union does protect them. That is something that needs to be addressed. If it was, I don't think that will magically increase the pay of the remaining teachers. You get rid of the worthless ones and you still have to hire others to take their place. There isn't a ton of cost savings there. Districts won't magically begin to pay more; look at private schools. Many private schools pay significantly less than public schools because they are non-union and they are able to.

 

[Ed323232]

View embedded media

The irony in Trump bragging about how great his socialist program is and lying about where the money is coming from to pay for it.

Wharton must really be a shit school.

 

[ram1955]

Bill, people have to be able to fund their HSA. Most people don't even sufficiently fund their 401K and now they are going to fund their HSA too? And when they don't?
I hear people daily who can't handle their $500 medical deductible and now they are going to save to handle a $5000 or higher deductible?
End result...providers raise rates and cost shift to the paying. Instead of writing off $500 they will have to write off $5000 and recover that lost revenue from others.
You think about people who are in your economic situation and think that it's the norm when in fact it's far from it.
(Related: I've long said that one of the next coming major economic issues will be the millions who have not sufficiently saved for retirement. When people are 70 yrs old and have burned through all of their savings and only have Social Security...)

50% of people pay zero federal income tax. How does making health insurance premiums deductible benefit them?

I have no issue with insurance companies competing across state lines but it would make next to zero difference. To sell a policy in a geographic area you have to show that you have a sufficient network of participating physicians within a reasonable distance. BTW, like us most insurers do compete in all 50 states. Not all for the same business but they are there in some capacity. Insurance rates are about spreading risks and if rates are higher in Kentucky than in Tennessee that's because the risks are lower in TN. Adding the Ky population may lower rates for Ky but will raise them for Tn. In the end it is all a zero sum game and regardless what you do there will be winners and losers.

So you want government in healthcare...but just to do the things you want them to do?
But really...a third of insured healthcare claims come from ER visits. If you break a leg are you calling around for the doc that will fix it the cheapest? If your wife is diagnosed with cancer, you shopping around?

Lastly, 5% of people account for 50% of healthcare spending in any given year. There are many solutions that seem great while you're in that 95%...yet when you have a stroke or heart attack, diagnosed with cancer, etc...you see the problems.

What you say is sensible, I have no problem with every person in the US having health insurance. We cannot afford it. IMO, we already pay too much to the gov in the form of taxes. Secondly, IMO, it's not the role of gov to provide for healthcare.

Look what happened when we were slammed with o'care. Let me guess: You'd say, "More people were insured due to o'care". You may be right, but I can tell you my insurance costs quadrupled and continue to rise.

Again, we cannot afford universal health care. Most importantly, again, IT"S NOT THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE HEALTHCARE.

All that aside, I do believe I have a moral obligation to care for the poor....but it's not the role of gov to hold me accountable for that.

 

[Platinumdrgn]

Guess Trump didn't think his new moves were playing well. Had to throw in some threats to feel big. If you slaughter 100s of thousands we will make you pay cash! Unmatched wisdom!