The Well-Mannered Politics Thread

[K-Dog]

@Sami84

This was in response to your post on your cop hatred from the Kap thread (deleted it due to being advised it was off topic)

Being someone that has had multiple cops in the family i don't know why I'm even bothering replying to your hatred, but here I go anyway. If you'd actually take the time to look past your stone hearted hatred and one way thinking, and not use a few examples (and one personal example) to lump all cops into one generazlied idea, maybe you'd actually see that the majority of cops out there aren't all the same jerks/murdering/hateful people. It's people with this thinking that to me don't deserve help from cops, if you knew what kind of work they go through, putting their lives on the line every time they step out to serve, and if you'd actually think about that, maybe you'd change your mind, but I don't think it will happen.

As for your hatred of the military? That's fine, the next time some country decides bomb us and take us over, maybe the "evil" military will do something to help our country. Maybe you don't agree in supporting our country and having a sense of pride, but I do, and there wouldn't be a military or country if our own people didn't stand up for all of us and actually want to make a difference way back when, but I guess I'm just being close minded. Do I agree with the way our governments run? No, I know there's some behind the scenes stuff that goes on and sometimes it seems like our government is just a puppet.

Thank you for this post.

Thanks to your family for their service.

 

[The Raven]

Serious question because I haven't been able to find the answer: what was the substance of Trump's healthcare plan? With Hillary everyone knew it would have been a complicated run of adjustments to subsidies, tax codes and regulations (whether that's good or bad it was at least clear what she would have tried to do) but I haven't seen any specifics of what Trump's been proposing aside from repealing Obamacare (which would need a replacement system of some kind or premiums would have to go up as companies price in the uncertainty) or letting it fail, which would be more of the first option. Repeal and replace have been the keywords out of Washington, but what's been proposed in the way of replacing? Because I genuinely haven't seen any proposals (involving specifics) from Trump.

The Republican healthcare plan was basically Obamacare except there was no individual mandate, no employer mandate, the risk corridors continued to go unfunded, and spending on medicaid decreased even more. As Sen. Rand Paul called it, it was "Obamacare Lite," and indeed it was. It was Obamacare with less of everything that made Obamacare "work."

Basically is was a giant "fuck you" to the poor and the elderly, and it would have drastically increased premiums in a couple years, in addition to driving millions off healthcare. The elderly would have faced such high premium increases it should have been criminal.

By the way, Obamacare doesn't work because Republicans never funded the risk corridors that would have stabilized premiums. Yay conservatism!

Single payer is the only thing that makes sense in a first world, civilized country but our (conservative) politicians are such slaves to the insurance lobby that it won't happen until Democrats have a majority again (but that won't happen because they don't know how to run campaigns or do messaging).

 

[Somerset Ravens]

The Republican healthcare plan was basically Obamacare except there was no individual mandate, no employer mandate, the risk corridors continued to go unfunded, and spending on medicaid decreased even more. As Sen. Rand Paul called it, it was "Obamacare Lite," and indeed it was. It was Obamacare with less of everything that made Obamacare "work."

Basically is was a giant "fuck you" to the poor and the elderly, and it would have drastically increased premiums in a couple years, in addition to driving millions off healthcare. The elderly would have faced such high premium increases it should have been criminal.

By the way, Obamacare doesn't work because Republicans never funded the risk corridors that would have stabilized premiums. Yay conservatism!

Single payer is the only thing that makes sense in a first world, civilized country but our (conservative) politicians are such slaves to the insurance lobby that it won't happen until Democrats have a majority again (but that won't happen because they don't know how to run campaigns or do messaging).

I was hoping you could help me understand your post. When you say premiums would drastically increase in a couple of years is that for all policies or just Obamacare policies?

If conservative politicians are slaves to the insurance lobby why wouldn't they fund the risk corridors? I thought risk corridors were in place to make sure insurance companies didn't lose money on Obamacare policies.

Thanks for your help.

 

[The Raven]

I was hoping you could help me understand your post. When you say premiums would drastically increase in a couple of years is that for all policies or just Obamacare policies?

If conservative politicians are slaves to the insurance lobby why wouldn't they fund the risk corridors? I thought risk corridors were in place to make sure insurance companies didn't lose money on Obamacare policies.

Thanks for your help.

1. Obamacare policies primarily.

2. The risk corridors were in place for that reason, but they were never adequately funded. Republicans haven't funded the risk corridors because that would involve paying for it, which would require a tax on the rich or some other tax. That puts Republicans in the precarious position of picking between a tax increase or a premium increase on Obamacare users. That's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the party of no new taxes. But if you don't fund it, and premiums go up, you can just blame Obamacare -- and that's exactly what we've seen happen.

 

[rossihunter2]

1. Obamacare policies primarily.

2. The risk corridors were in place for that reason, but they were never adequately funded. Republicans haven't funded the risk corridors because that would involve paying for it, which would require a tax on the rich or some other tax. That puts Republicans in the precarious position of picking between a tax increase or a premium increase on Obamacare users. That's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the party of no new taxes. But if you don't fund it, and premiums go up, you can just blame Obamacare -- and that's exactly what we've seen happen.

i just dont understand how the number 1 global political "superpower" has maybe the worst and least fair healthcare system on the planet

 

[The Raven]

i just dont understand how the number 1 global political "superpower" has maybe the worst and least fair healthcare system on the planet

My flippant answer: Because the right wing of this country has never done a damn thing to help the poor get ahead, and I'd implore anyone to tell me what they think the right has done to help anyone but the rich. There's nothing "maybe" about it. Our healthcare system is inefficient, costly, unfair, and ineffective compared to just about every other first world country. Most of the others have single payer systems, which are cheaper, more efficient, and more effective. And they cover more people. Universal coverage in most, if not all. Despite the benefits, and despite have the highest GDP, and despite having the best doctors, Republicans don't want singlepayer or universal coverage. I'll let someone else fill in the blanks, because I can't do it politely.

My "well mannered" answer: Because healthcare overhaul is expensive and time intensive and scary.

 

[Somerset Ravens]

1. Obamacare policies primarily.

2. The risk corridors were in place for that reason, but they were never adequately funded. Republicans haven't funded the risk corridors because that would involve paying for it, which would require a tax on the rich or some other tax. That puts Republicans in the precarious position of picking between a tax increase or a premium increase on Obamacare users. That's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the party of no new taxes. But if you don't fund it, and premiums go up, you can just blame Obamacare -- and that's exactly what we've seen happen.

Thanks for the information. It seems to be a matter of who pays for it, those who use Obamacare or those who do not.
Regardless of who pays is does not seem there is good value for the money spent.

 

[Willbacker]

1. Obamacare policies primarily.

2. The risk corridors were in place for that reason, but they were never adequately funded. Republicans haven't funded the risk corridors because that would involve paying for it, which would require a tax on the rich or some other tax. That puts Republicans in the precarious position of picking between a tax increase or a premium increase on Obamacare users. That's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the party of no new taxes. But if you don't fund it, and premiums go up, you can just blame Obamacare -- and that's exactly what we've seen happen.

Tax is always the liberal answer isn't it. Tax the rich. Watch it roll down to the middle class. Watch the poor sit on their ass. I mean why work when subsidation pays just as well.

 

[Inqui]

The Republican healthcare plan was basically Obamacare except there was no individual mandate, no employer mandate, the risk corridors continued to go unfunded, and spending on medicaid decreased even more. As Sen. Rand Paul called it, it was "Obamacare Lite," and indeed it was. It was Obamacare with less of everything that made Obamacare "work."

Basically is was a giant "fuck you" to the poor and the elderly, and it would have drastically increased premiums in a couple years, in addition to driving millions off healthcare. The elderly would have faced such high premium increases it should have been criminal.

By the way, Obamacare doesn't work because Republicans never funded the risk corridors that would have stabilized premiums. Yay conservatism!

Single payer is the only thing that makes sense in a first world, civilized country but our (conservative) politicians are such slaves to the insurance lobby that it won't happen until Democrats have a majority again (but that won't happen because they don't know how to run campaigns or do messaging).

Yeah, I know about the Republican plan (or however many variants they've tried to pass already), but with all this getting mad at the congressional Republicans I'm trying to work out what the POTUS himself is actually proposing - all I've heard from him is a promise to repeal Obamacare with a system that'll be cheaper and have more people covered, which would obviously be fantastic but he never specified how and I'm honestly wondering if I missed anything.

Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if he were a fan of single-payer in his heart of hearts given the way he praised Australia's healthcare system when visiting Malcolm Turnbull.

I don't disagree about single-payer, but like I say I'm in one of (many) countries that uses that and the public books here are in great shape. I remember reading somewhere (I don't have the numbers on hand so I'd have to confirm this again) that the US government spends a higher proportion of its budget on healthcare than most (if not all) other OECD countries but still has a much lower rate of citizens who are covered. That seems pretty inefficient right there.

The current system came about because people were sick of eight years of Bush and swept the Democrats to power in all three houses. I imagine it would take a similar push happening again to make Obamacare less bastardised. The plaform they're rolling out suggests they're (finally) starting to get the picture ("A Better Deal" being a throwback to the New Deal, and putting more focus on jobs, healthcare and 21st century energy - issues that actually affect their entire base as opposed to the train wreck of a campaign they ran last year), so time will tell on that front I guess. The recent polling on the ACA suggests the issue is more or less theirs to lose.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Yeah, I know about the Republican plan (or however many variants they've tried to pass already), but with all this getting mad at the congressional Republicans I'm trying to work out what the POTUS himself is actually proposing - all I've heard from him is a promise to repeal Obamacare with a system that'll be cheaper and have more people covered, which would obviously be fantastic but he never specified how and I'm honestly wondering if I missed anything.

No, you're not missing anything. This is basically how his entire campaign and presidency to this point has been run.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

With the recent potential ban on the transgender community and the military (POTUS has no say in who can serve in the military; it is the job of Congress), I see a lot of people defending this potential decision because it might cost tax payers around $2-$8M for transgenders to undergo the surgeries.

Anyway, when I was reading about all this, I stumbled upon something that was absolutely hilarious. The DoD spent $6M on airlifting NINE GOATS to Afghanistan. We're worried about $2M going to surgeries when the government is spending $6M on rare Italian goats.

 

[29BmoreBird22]

Which would require a tax on the rich or some other tax. That puts Republicans in the precarious position of picking between a tax increase or a premium increase on Obamacare users. That's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the party of no new taxes.

You're going to hit a sore spot for people. People hate taxes and never want new taxes, but they want public roads, public schools, highways, the military, clean drinking water, public transportation, great health care, etc.

Anyone here ever been to Delaware? I always use this as an example, but when I go from Ocean City into Delaware, you know you've crossed the state line because the roads are full of pot holes and the sidewalks are just dirt paths. The only difference is that Delaware has no sales tax.

 

[K-Dog]

With the recent potential ban on the transgender community and the military (POTUS has no say in who can serve in the military; it is the job of Congress), I see a lot of people defending this potential decision because it might cost tax payers around $2-$8M for transgenders to undergo the surgeries.

Anyway, when I was reading about all this, I stumbled upon something that was absolutely hilarious. The DoD spent $6M on airlifting NINE GOATS to Afghanistan. We're worried about $2M going to surgeries when the government is spending $6M on rare Italian goats.

Government waste is so vast and widespread it is sickening. $9m on airlifting goats while possibly a good deal for the government is just the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Inqui]

No, you're not missing anything. This is basically how his entire campaign and presidency to this point has been run.

I don't disagree - I started on a spiel earlier in this thread about how "America first" and "MAGA", while reasonable pursuits, were open to interpretation. It's something I was disappointed about during the campaign - everything was soundbites and outrageous things the candidates said, but almost no points of substance were covered that I saw. And obviously this would be the result of a campaign like that. But that's why I thought I'd ask - seeing in the spirit of open-mindedness whether there are any substantial proposals I missed from the man himself (who's shifted at various points between backing and criticising the Republican party plan) beyond the big promises.

 

[Oldfaithful]

Idk about y'all but this is the greatest season of the apprentice that I've ever watched. So much captivating drama, so much anger on all sides. Donald Trump is making everyone go crazy, and firing people at will like he's always done. This is fucking awesome. It's ratings are at an all time low, but that's fine. Greatest season of TV ever, 10/10. Would not recommend.

 

[Rusfan]

If you start trying to tax the rich outrageously how long do you think they'll stay here?

 

[29BmoreBird22]

If you start trying to tax the rich outrageously how long do you think they'll stay here?

Pretty long because they have outrageous taxes now; they just get out of them through loopholes.

 

[Rusfan]

Pretty long because they have outrageous taxes now; they just get out of them through loopholes.

I just can't believe how high some people say we should go. I mean I've heard people say almost 100% completely seriously

 

[29BmoreBird22]

I just can't believe how high some people say we should go. I mean I've heard people say almost 100% completely seriously

I think right now it's at like 55%, but I'd imagine most are paying between 20-35%. Total guess and have no substance to back that off, but the rich know how to get out of taxes.

If they actually paid the 55% in full and couldn't get out of it through loopholes (I think Trump got out of taxes for over 10 years when he bankrupted a company of his), I'd be pretty happy with that.

 

[Willbacker]

I don't disagree - I started on a spiel earlier in this thread about how "America first" and "MAGA", while reasonable pursuits, were open to interpretation. It's something I was disappointed about during the campaign - everything was soundbites and outrageous things the candidates said, but almost no points of substance were covered that I saw. And obviously this would be the result of a campaign like that. But that's why I thought I'd ask - seeing in the spirit of open-mindedness whether there are any substantial proposals I missed from the man himself (who's shifted at various points between backing and criticising the Republican party plan) beyond the big promises.

You do understand the U.S. is 1000x bigger when it comes down to the healthcare situation. That's a big mistake if your not factoring that in when it comes to cost and operation. We have way more poor and immigration and its not even freakin close and then please don't think the rich are paying for it lol.

Also its not Trump fulfilling his promises its Congress.