Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 22, 2017, 06:26:43 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 393
101  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Kalwejt Foundation for the Promotion of Atlas Hilarity on: May 07, 2017, 06:53:40 pm
This thread actually reminds me of the local elections in Styria in 1997.
102  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Emmanuel Macron on: May 07, 2017, 03:26:29 pm


^Hollande is the portrait to Macron's Dorian Gray.
103  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Sen. Harkin blames Obama for Public Option failure, supports Single Payer on: May 07, 2017, 03:17:31 pm
Also keep in mind that Rahm wanted Obama to give up on the reform entirely. He didn't think it had the votes and wasn't worth the political capital.

We always hear that Emanuel wanted a larger stimulus instead, but judging from his record in Chicago it seems just as likely that he wanted to focus on Obama priorities that never left the backburner, like cutting a bipartisan deal on reducing Social Security benefits or funneling federal education dollars toward charter schools.
104  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: "Universal healthcare now!" must be the Democratic motto in 2018 on: May 07, 2017, 03:04:06 pm
Quote
The most honest and sophisticated discussions of the ACA cannot but admit that it does not amount to universal coverage.

I mean Democrats have been saying this for years, even Obama has said this time after time. The goal of the ACA was always to be the first step towards universal coverage. But it was never going to achieve that goal without changes down the line.

And I think you are underestimating the public. We have already seen in polls that the majority of Americans want to see the ACA do more, so it obvious that people understood that wasn't universal coverage for everyone.

One of the goals of the ACA was to increase coverage. Another was reduce cost growth. On the former count, the ACA has been a clear success. On the latter count, it has not been.

Informed people tend to realize that Republicans are bull$hitting the public when it comes to knowing how to cover more Americans, but there's a more widespread delusion that Democrats know how to reduce costs, or that costs in health care aren't really a problem if we distribute them fairly. But even the "single payer" mantra isn't an answer to the cost growth problem, no matter how much its proponents will argue that it is more efficient.

Few Democrats seem to realize just how little clarity we are getting from the party on cost growth in health care and just how serious an obstacle this is to achieving universal coverage. It's not enough to pretend that we could transfer any amount of costs generated in the health care sector to the most affluent Americans, and not just because that would be politically unsustainable.

Even among those of us who support a more equal distribution of wealth and income, other priorities have to count for something. What about education, child care, housing, public spaces, environmental protection and every other human need that can be improved through public goods? Every dollar that goes toward health care is a dollar that cannot go toward something else. We pay far more than other countries and the disparity continues to grow. What will Democrats do about it? What will anyone do about it?
105  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Politico: Democrats tackle the 'big rebuild' on: May 07, 2017, 02:31:26 pm
It's awful news for Dem prospects with the farm vote that the only specific policy change mentioned at this point is "eliminating silos."
106  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump administration forcing federal employees to watch Fox "News" on: May 07, 2017, 02:24:57 pm
The mediocre wings are reason enough to go elsewhere in any part of the country where you can buy hot wings at most bars for less than half the price that you can find at "B-Dubs."
107  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: "Universal healthcare now!" must be the Democratic motto in 2018 on: May 07, 2017, 02:18:45 pm
Unfortunately, even a rhetorical commitment to any universal healthcare policy would require that campaigning Democrats admit that Obama did not already achieve universal healthcare for the United States by signing the Affordable Care Act, a common and persistent piece of confusion that that party loyalists are increasingly reluctant to acknowledge.

This is false.

Democrats admitted even during the signing of the ACA that this was just a first step towards universal coverage. 

The most honest and sophisticated discussions of the ACA cannot but admit that it does not amount to universal coverage. You may have noticed that many political discussions are not especially honest or sophisticated. A large share of the voting public does not understand the difference - e.g. multiple major newspapers have run columns clarifying that the ACA is not universal within the past several months.

We've also seen a great deal of outrage over AHCA leaving millions of people uncovered. Only a moral monster could support that, we are told. Unfortunately, the ACA also left 25M+ Americans without health insurance. That was more than before, of course, and at a higher standard of coverage, but it's not as if no one lost their coverage because of the law.

I'm not trying to be obtuse. If Democrats campaign on achieving universal coverage, this is an obvious and natural question for most voters: What the hell did you do in 2009? That's not an easy question to answer. It is not an easy appeal to clarify.
108  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: "Universal healthcare now!" must be the Democratic motto in 2018 on: May 07, 2017, 02:12:59 pm
Is universal health care the same thing as single payer? I support the former, but resist the latter, unless there is no other way to do it, that will not cost a lot more money (other than money which funds drug research).

They do not need to be the same, and universal health care can be operated with a multi-payer system. In Germany there are over 100 funds that insure most of the population, paid for by a combination of employer, employee and government contributions. The premium is fixed for individuals in these funds independent of risk. There is also an opt-out provision for qualified individuals to pay a tax and buy insurance independently of the regulated funds, but those individuals can be charged based on risk.

Thank you. Do you think the German model has merit to consider for the US?

There is no reason to condemn the German model as less likely to work well here than single payer, but neither necessarily helps when the underlying costs of delivering health care in the United State are around twice as much per capita compared to Germany, which itself is fairly expensive compared to many other rich countries. "Universal health care" is a wonderful and high-minded commitment, but it's far from a direct answer to our health care affordability problem.

The ACA has been good mostly at moving costs around to keep hospitals open, individuals out of bankruptcy, state and local governments solvent, and businesses able to afford insurance for their employees. But the costs are still there, and still growing. They are probably a major factor behind increasingly toxic politics on an issue that has always been politically toxic. Unfortunately, no one in power appears to have much interest in addressing - except maybe by cutting off some of the most basic forms of health care for the most vulnerable and powerless people.

As difficult as it to talk about health care coverage, it's much more difficult to talk about health care delivery.
109  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: "Universal healthcare now!" must be the Democratic motto in 2018 on: May 07, 2017, 02:02:59 pm
Unfortunately, even a rhetorical commitment to any universal healthcare policy would require that campaigning Democrats admit that Obama did not already achieve universal healthcare for the United States by signing the Affordable Care Act, a common and persistent piece of confusion that that party loyalists are increasingly reluctant to acknowledge.
110  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to de-mod Hashemite on: May 07, 2017, 01:14:25 pm
Someone isn't taking Le Pen's loss well.
111  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: FCC launches investigation on Stephen Colbert over insulting Trump on TV on: May 06, 2017, 10:37:23 pm
It's an indictment of the general public as well. Neil Postman was right.

Quote
Tyrants of all varieties have always known about the value of providing the masses with amusements as a means of pacifying discontent. But most of them could not have even hoped for a situation in which the masses would ignore that which does not amuse. That is why tyrants have always relied, and still do, on censorship. Censorship, after all, is the tribute tyrants pay to the assumption that a public knows the difference between serious discourse and entertainment—and cares. How delighted would be all the kings, czars and führers of the past (and commissars of the present) to know that censorship is not a necessity when all political discourse takes the form of a jest.

See also: Fox and Friends, Morning Joe, Rush Limbaugh, the grotesque assortment of personalities that dominate local programming on radio and television
112  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump administration forcing federal employees to watch Fox "News" on: May 06, 2017, 07:35:03 am
Why do federal agencies have televisions constantly streaming cable news as a matter of agency policy in the first place? Doesn't that seem more than a bit odd in itself?

The couple places I've been to typically have a TV on in a break/lunch room.

I mean, I think that's bad - employees should be able to take a break unmolested - but it's not especially unusual. But why are their break room television programs not just constantly left on, but tuned to a particular station as a matter of agency policy?
113  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump administration forcing federal employees to watch Fox "News" on: May 05, 2017, 09:02:43 pm
Why do federal agencies have televisions constantly streaming cable news as a matter of agency policy in the first place? Doesn't that seem more than a bit odd in itself?
114  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Bernie Sanders at fault for Clinton's loss? on: May 05, 2017, 08:28:07 pm
The affirmative responses here are astoundingly cynical. "Yes, it is Sanders' fault that HRC lost, because many Democratic voters would not have realized how much they disliked her if she had not faced a heavily contested primary against a candidate whom those voters found much more appealing!"

I didn't "realize" some hatred for what Clinton was; honestly, I started hating Clinton due to her being the reason bernie wasn't going to win the nomination.

And why do you think that's generalizable? Political arguments are no substitute for self-reflection, which is what you seem to have needed.
115  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: How will Americans of 2064 view the state of America in 2017? on: May 05, 2017, 08:23:11 pm
I'm distracted by your mention of the Apollo landings in your opening post, and how the fact that we once visited the moon and never bothered going back in person will only become more remarkable as time passes. If there isn't another manned lunar landing by 2064, that would be getting close to an entire century without one. But who knows what might happen over that amount of time, I guess. It seems extremely unlikely that we'll see one within the next decade, but I don't know how anyone would predict the odds of going back beyond that.
116  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: How many relationships have you been in? on: May 05, 2017, 07:52:12 pm
I imagine a "half relationship" comprising of a person doing all of the things that people in stereotypical relationships do, but alone - i.e. taking themselves out to dinner, going on occasional "dates" to the movies or mini-golf or whatever, buying themselves presents on whatever anniversaries or occasions they deem significant, and occasionally making minor romantic gestures for the sake of reminding themselves how much they are appreciated.
117  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Kalwejt Foundation for the Promotion of Atlas Hilarity on: May 05, 2017, 06:28:24 pm
Wow now using political means to go after enemy's, just like the right accused the IRS of doing.
118  General Politics / Individual Politics / Are men who buy sex rapists? on: May 05, 2017, 06:27:28 pm
Quote
119  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: House Of Cards Season 5 Trailer released: on: May 05, 2017, 06:16:34 pm
Do i offend people if i say i like the British version more than this American version.

Both are pretty bad shows anchored by an amusing performance of the starring role. I suppose the American version looks nicer.
120  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Huey Long on: May 05, 2017, 05:54:28 pm
Possibly the most overrated machine boss in US history; a less impressive Tammany with an aesthetic that is somehow still fetishized by a fading cadre rural/Southern/white redistributionists.
121  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: Atlantic: Are We Having Too Much Fun? on: May 05, 2017, 05:39:47 pm
Postman is worth reading if only because his thinking is so far removed from anything that most people encounter in public life today. He's substantively correct about the influence of television on politics and society and prescient in a lot of ways about the internet.

The article seems kind of silly, though.
122  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The ExtremeRepublican Landfill for Absurd, Ignorant, and Deplorable Posts VI on: May 05, 2017, 05:31:26 pm
Outside of the largely gay and/of socially inept world of Atlas, girls still expect guys to make the first move and most certainly don't consider you a violator if it doesn't work out, LMFAO.

This is extremely far from the truth for most young American men. I don't doubt that there are some social circles in which what you say is the case, but it's also true that many men have poor social skills and fail to notice women who make advances, or don't like the women who actually approach them enough to pay attention to them in that way, or are extremely unattractive to women on account of appearance or behavior.
123  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of TrumpCare on: May 05, 2017, 05:23:49 pm
A step towards getting the government out of the health care business, so I would have voted for it even though I would have just preferred a bill that said "the government has no role in funding or providing health care".

What about disabled veterans?

You see, they knew the risks when they took the job, so it's obviously their own personal responsibility. Smiley

No, they are government employees, so obviously that is an exception.  Prices would be driven down to the point that there would be no need for health insurance if only there weren't insurance to insulate us from the costs (with plans for catastrophic events).  Buying a doctor visit should be more like buying a loaf of bread.  A huge part of the problem is that we don't see a board with the prices they charge for each procedure so that people can pick and choose what they want.  If we actually had a real supply-and-demand system here, there would be little need for insurance at all (and, for poor people, if there were no government programs, there would be no poor people because they would actually want to get out of poverty instead of mooch off the government),

I was about to say, you might as well add active-duty service members, current public employees, and government retirees. Or, for that matter, Medicaid, which is mostly children, elderly and disabled people, or adults who can't work because they serve as full-time caregivers.

But you've taken Nathan's point and made it beautifully f**king illustrated, to the point that I doubt that you're serious. (I've heard similar points from Regular Joes, but they're not people who would spend even five minutes on a politics forum, even if they were functionally literate.)

By the way, how many loaves of bread do you think most people with cerebral palsy are likely to buy if they are left to their own devices? Is that going to come from the sweat of their brows?
124  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: FCC launches investigation on Stephen Colbert over insulting Trump on TV on: May 05, 2017, 05:17:14 pm
I mentioned in another thread that The Daily Show has aged poorly. Part of this comes from watching the effect that it had on people in my mid-twenties to early-thirties age cohort. Detached and smug cynicism is a poor look as of 2017, and it makes you a bad citizen besides. Yet that's where so many of my intelligent, liberal-leaning peers have wound up, and the influence of TDS on how they thought about politics had a lot to do with that. My impression is that college students today more clearly realize the harm caused by that kind of complacence.
125  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: FCC launches investigation on Stephen Colbert over insulting Trump on TV on: May 05, 2017, 05:13:20 pm
After reading Colbert's comments I'd like to launch an investigation into what passes for incisive political comedy on late night television. I get that it feels good to hear a celebrity saying these things, but do people honestly find any humor or insight in this, or is the intent purely cathartic?

Insight?  No.  Humor?  Eh, it'd probably be worth a chuckle in context at 11:45 at night.  I mean it's nothing great, but most people also aren't necessarily looking for an hour-long treatise on international politics at 11:30 at night after a hard day's work, especially if they're watching a CBS/ABC/NBC late night program.  It's okay to have fairly light, mindless humor too.  If you're watching The Late Show looking for "incisive political comedy" then you're in the wrong place.  While Colbert is far better than the likes of Kimmel or Fallon (who wouldn't know a funny joke if it hit him in the face), he has never made any pretense of offering thought-provoking, informative political satire during his time on The Late Show.  The best place to get that (on TV at least) since Stewart left The Daily Show is Last Week Tonight.

Of course. Given how preoccupied certain corners of the internet have become with this spat, though, it's worth reflecting on what is it stake - i.e. is it worth making a martyr of someone for the sake of mindless, egregious vulgarity? It's worth caring about from a civil liberties perspective, but only in a principled, hands-off kind of way that doesn't endorse or celebrate the actual content. We live in a time in which there is no shortage of victims who deserve more attention than this ridiculous tantrum.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 393


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines