It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2025 3:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
That's just wrong. You seem to have trouble grasping that there are vast swaths of the American public that are struggling. That seems to be so far out of your experience that you can barely fathom it being an actual position. So you see Hillary- or someone like her- as "sensible". Things are pretty good and slowly getting better. You'll never be able to see why anyone would support "radical" changes.
Save that for another thread. We are discussing debate performance based on platform. Bernie had a big advantage with his "Free puppies for everyone!" style.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:19 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are about to be many people sitting at home without a job. I think we have to stop with this idea that work is the entire definition of you as a person because we will have machines doing our work for us very soon.

As for Bernie- he was for a "livable wage" something that Rick has supported. He was trying to push down student loan debt, which I do not see as radical. Just making something that has become basically more private a public good again. The last thing he wanted was healthcare for all, which should be a goal. There would have been plenty of debate on how to get there. It would not be "free stuff", which is policy if you are the right type of person anyway.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:21 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
That's just wrong. You seem to have trouble grasping that there are vast swaths of the American public that are struggling. That seems to be so far out of your experience that you can barely fathom it being an actual position. So you see Hillary- or someone like her- as "sensible". Things are pretty good and slowly getting better. You'll never be able to see why anyone would support "radical" changes.
Save that for another thread. We are discussing debate performance based on platform. Bernie had a big advantage with his "Free puppies for everyone!" style.


What I said is completely relevant to this discussion due to your repeated characterizations of Sanders' platform as "free puppies for everyone".

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?



That's a good question. And I do not know. What I am fairly certain of is that it does not have enough for everyone to be in a competition to consume as many resources as possible during our lifetimes for much longer.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 82996
I attended Northwestern v. Illinois last night instead.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
FavreFan wrote:
Again, we agree on the last part of this post. I just don't understand your previous argument. It doesn't make sense.
Here is an example:

Imagine I am given 30 seconds to make an argument that every person should be given an all expenses paid trip to a destination of their choice in the United States every other year.

I spend the next 30 seconds grandstanding about how hard people work, and how they deserve some joy, and how it wouldn't be expensive because we can have the rich pay for it. Most of the people are sitting there saying "Wow. That would be nice and help a ton of people".
You then have 30 seconds to say why it is a bad idea. You are already at a disadvantage because it sounds great and has people saying how nice it would be and in general people think doing nice things is better than not doing them. You also are facing a proposal where nothing negative was brought up. You quickly scramble to say it would be expensive and hard to manage and we don't really need to do this and it may hurt the economy.

You are probably right but people will like my side better. They will look at me more favorably. They will even say "Well, it's more about the idea rather than the execution!". People who want a vacation will think it was a great idea and won't care about paying for it or any of the logistics.

This is why Bernie had an advantage in the debates. His platform was much more of a platform you could say "Yeah, that would be awesome!".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41485
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?


I would say we absolutely have the resources to offer every person a "reasonable" treatment plan for all medical conditions. Of course plans to oppose this, those wheels were set in motion decades ago under the Reagan administration when they fought Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'm guessing that didn't get huge media attention at the time. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Again, we agree on the last part of this post. I just don't understand your previous argument. It doesn't make sense.
Here is an example:

Imagine I am given 30 seconds to make an argument that every person should be given an all expenses paid trip to a destination of their choice in the United States every other year.

I spend the next 30 seconds grandstanding about how hard people work, and how they deserve some joy, and how it wouldn't be expensive because we can have the rich pay for it. Most of the people are sitting there saying "Wow. That would be nice and help a ton of people".
You then have 30 seconds to say why it is a bad idea. You are already at a disadvantage because it sounds great and has people saying how nice it would be and in general people think doing nice things is better than not doing them. You also are facing a proposal where nothing negative was brought up. You quickly scramble to say it would be expensive and hard to manage and we don't really need to do this and it may hurt the economy.

You are probably right but people will like my side better. They will look at me more favorably. They will even say "Well, it's more about the idea rather than the execution!". People who want a vacation will think it was a great idea and won't care about paying for it or any of the logistics.

This is why Bernie had an advantage in the debates. His platform was much more of a platform you could say "Yeah, that would be awesome!".

You're wrong, and for two main reasons you keep failing to acknowledge.

1.) that's not an accurate depiction of Bernie's message, and I know I keep saying this but it bears repeating that I don't even agree with him.

2.) If what you are saying is true he would've done better in the primary and many other politicians would be adopting his message. They aren't.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
That's just wrong. You seem to have trouble grasping that there are vast swaths of the American public that are struggling. That seems to be so far out of your experience that you can barely fathom it being an actual position. So you see Hillary- or someone like her- as "sensible". Things are pretty good and slowly getting better. You'll never be able to see why anyone would support "radical" changes.
Save that for another thread. We are discussing debate performance based on platform. Bernie had a big advantage with his "Free puppies for everyone!" style.


What I said is completely relevant to this discussion due to your repeated characterizations of Sanders' platform as "free puppies for everyone".
His platform wasn't "Free puppies for everyone!". He just had a lot of talking points that were basically "Free puppies for everyone!".

When Bernie was relevant, we had a lot of discussions where people refused to acknowledge that ANY of his policies were unworkable. After all, we could just either tax the rich or cut the military! 312player basically did the same thing again.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Again, we agree on the last part of this post. I just don't understand your previous argument. It doesn't make sense.
Here is an example:

Imagine I am given 30 seconds to make an argument that every person should be given an all expenses paid trip to a destination of their choice in the United States every other year.

I spend the next 30 seconds grandstanding about how hard people work, and how they deserve some joy, and how it wouldn't be expensive because we can have the rich pay for it. Most of the people are sitting there saying "Wow. That would be nice and help a ton of people".
You then have 30 seconds to say why it is a bad idea. You are already at a disadvantage because it sounds great and has people saying how nice it would be and in general people think doing nice things is better than not doing them. You also are facing a proposal where nothing negative was brought up. You quickly scramble to say it would be expensive and hard to manage and we don't really need to do this and it may hurt the economy.

You are probably right but people will like my side better. They will look at me more favorably. They will even say "Well, it's more about the idea rather than the execution!". People who want a vacation will think it was a great idea and won't care about paying for it or any of the logistics.

This is why Bernie had an advantage in the debates. His platform was much more of a platform you could say "Yeah, that would be awesome!".


Except he said a $15 wage, free public tuition and a better healthcare system. Something that's impossible, except in half of Europe.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
That's just wrong. You seem to have trouble grasping that there are vast swaths of the American public that are struggling. That seems to be so far out of your experience that you can barely fathom it being an actual position. So you see Hillary- or someone like her- as "sensible". Things are pretty good and slowly getting better. You'll never be able to see why anyone would support "radical" changes.
Save that for another thread. We are discussing debate performance based on platform. Bernie had a big advantage with his "Free puppies for everyone!" style.


What I said is completely relevant to this discussion due to your repeated characterizations of Sanders' platform as "free puppies for everyone".
His platform wasn't "Free puppies for everyone!". He just had a lot of talking points that were basically "Free puppies for everyone!".

When Bernie was relevant, we had a lot of discussions where people refused to acknowledge that ANY of his policies were unworkable. After all, we could just either tax the rich or cut the military! 312player basically did the same thing again.

Cutting the military budget significantly should be at the top of any politicians priority list. Nothing comes close to that department when it comes to financial waste.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41485
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
The far right wing approach to healthcare will work, if they just come out and say "Fuck it, some poor people are going to have to die". Just get it over with already....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
FavreFan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Again, we agree on the last part of this post. I just don't understand your previous argument. It doesn't make sense.
Here is an example:

Imagine I am given 30 seconds to make an argument that every person should be given an all expenses paid trip to a destination of their choice in the United States every other year.

I spend the next 30 seconds grandstanding about how hard people work, and how they deserve some joy, and how it wouldn't be expensive because we can have the rich pay for it. Most of the people are sitting there saying "Wow. That would be nice and help a ton of people".
You then have 30 seconds to say why it is a bad idea. You are already at a disadvantage because it sounds great and has people saying how nice it would be and in general people think doing nice things is better than not doing them. You also are facing a proposal where nothing negative was brought up. You quickly scramble to say it would be expensive and hard to manage and we don't really need to do this and it may hurt the economy.

You are probably right but people will like my side better. They will look at me more favorably. They will even say "Well, it's more about the idea rather than the execution!". People who want a vacation will think it was a great idea and won't care about paying for it or any of the logistics.

This is why Bernie had an advantage in the debates. His platform was much more of a platform you could say "Yeah, that would be awesome!".

You're wrong, and for two main reasons you keep failing to acknowledge.

1.) that's not an accurate depiction of Bernie's message, and I know I keep saying this but it bears repeating that I don't even agree with him.

2.) If what you are saying is true he would've done better in the primary and many other politicians would be adopting his message. They aren't.
This is the last time I am going to repeat it. The discussion is about debate performance. It is not about the campaign at large. In the campaign at large, the negative parts of his plan come out more and if he had ever been a real threat to be President it would have become a much bigger deal.

Debates are mostly self contained things.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:33 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Caller Bob wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?


I would say we absolutely have the resources to offer every person a "reasonable" treatment plan for all medical conditions. Of course plans to oppose this, those wheels were set in motion decades ago under the Reagan administration when they fought Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'm guessing that didn't get huge media attention at the time. :lol:


I don't know if you saw this, but Pelosi was on a campus taking student questions and this little gay twink got the mic and prefaced his question by saying that polling shows most Democrats under the age of 29 are actually anti-capitalist (interesting considering the prescriptions of LTG and other old school Dems for saving the party). She immediately started giggly dismissively and said, "Uh, okay, we're capitalists", as if that was some indisputable and unchangeable fact of life equal to Michael Jordan being the greatest basketball player ever.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
:lol:

You're still wrong though. That's why everyone is trying to tell that to you. He didn't "win" the primary debates except for people who already liked him. It's why his message isn't as popular. I don't see how you can't get this.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Except he said a $15 wage, free public tuition and a better healthcare system. Something that's impossible, except in half of Europe.
I believe in a $15 wage too.
Free public tuitions comes with some tradeoffs too. Sorry kid, you didn't qualify.
The problem is that Bernie's single payer system doesn't reflect the best of European health care either.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
This is a bit, right?

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Free public tuition is by far his worst idea. Some of the others I could be talked into possibly.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
FavreFan wrote:
:lol:

You're still wrong though. That's why everyone is trying to tell that to you. He didn't "win" the primary debates except for people who already liked him. It's why his message isn't as popular. I don't see how you can't get this.
So it is the general consensus that Bernie lost the debates to Hillary? That isn't my impression but I'm cool with that.

Bernie lost the debates and his message wasn't popular! Take that JORR!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Except he said a $15 wage, free public tuition and a better healthcare system. Something that's impossible, except in half of Europe.
I believe in a $15 wage too.
Free public tuitions comes with some tradeoffs too. Sorry kid, you didn't qualify.
The problem is that Bernie's single payer system doesn't reflect the best of European health care either.


So you support 2 out of 3 of his proposals, and would be willing to compromise on the health care?

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?


I would say we absolutely have the resources to offer every person a "reasonable" treatment plan for all medical conditions. Of course plans to oppose this, those wheels were set in motion decades ago under the Reagan administration when they fought Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'm guessing that didn't get huge media attention at the time. :lol:


I don't know if you saw this, but Pelosi was on a campus taking student questions and this little gay twink got the mic and prefaced his question by saying that polling shows most Democrats under the age of 29 are actually anti-capitalist (interesting considering the prescriptions of LTG and other old school Dems for saving the party). She immediately started giggly dismissively and said, "Uh, okay, we're capitalists", as if that was some indisputable and unchangeable fact of life equal to Michael Jordan being the greatest basketball player ever.



Wonder why: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/201 ... /96530338/

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Except he said a $15 wage, free public tuition and a better healthcare system. Something that's impossible, except in half of Europe.
I believe in a $15 wage too.
Free public tuitions comes with some tradeoffs too. Sorry kid, you didn't qualify.
The problem is that Bernie's single payer system doesn't reflect the best of European health care either.


So you support 2 out of 3 of his proposals, and would be willing to compromise on the health care?
I do not support free public tuition. It's a horrible idea.
I will never support single payer health care because it is bad. It's trading our problems for new and possibly worse problems.

Bernie didn't invent the idea of a $15 minimum wage.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
:lol:

You're still wrong though. That's why everyone is trying to tell that to you. He didn't "win" the primary debates except for people who already liked him. It's why his message isn't as popular. I don't see how you can't get this.
So it is the general consensus that Bernie lost the debates to Hillary? That isn't my impression but I'm cool with that.

Bernie lost the debates and his message wasn't popular! Take that JORR!

:lol:

You see why people make fun of you for the binary stuff though, right? His message resonated with a lot more people than anyone expected. It clearly wasn't popular enough to say the majority of people liked it, even in sound bite debate style. But for no reason in particular you need to have it labeled as popular or not popular. :lol:

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:40 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
Caller Bob wrote:
The far right wing approach to healthcare will work, if they just come out and say "Fuck it, some poor people are going to have to die". Just get it over with already....



I think one mechanical aspect to the healthcare debate that would clarify things would be if we stopped acting as if this is "insurance" when pre-existing conditions are covered. Insurance works by spreading risk. It simply can't cover pre-existing conditions. It would be as if I didn't need to buy auto insurance until after I got in an accident. This is a government program and we shouldn't hide from that. There's no shame in giving medical care to those who can't afford it. We do it already with Medicaid.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72569
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?


I would say we absolutely have the resources to offer every person a "reasonable" treatment plan for all medical conditions. Of course plans to oppose this, those wheels were set in motion decades ago under the Reagan administration when they fought Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'm guessing that didn't get huge media attention at the time. :lol:


I don't know if you saw this, but Pelosi was on a campus taking student questions and this little gay twink got the mic and prefaced his question by saying that polling shows most Democrats under the age of 29 are actually anti-capitalist (interesting considering the prescriptions of LTG and other old school Dems for saving the party). She immediately started giggly dismissively and said, "Uh, okay, we're capitalists", as if that was some indisputable and unchangeable fact of life equal to Michael Jordan being the greatest basketball player ever.

It is.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93640
Location: To the left of my post
FavreFan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
:lol:

You're still wrong though. That's why everyone is trying to tell that to you. He didn't "win" the primary debates except for people who already liked him. It's why his message isn't as popular. I don't see how you can't get this.
So it is the general consensus that Bernie lost the debates to Hillary? That isn't my impression but I'm cool with that.

Bernie lost the debates and his message wasn't popular! Take that JORR!

:lol:

You see why people make fun of you for the binary stuff though, right? His message resonated with a lot more people than anyone expected. It clearly wasn't popular enough to say the majority of people liked it, even in sound bite debate style. But for no reason in particular you need to have it labeled as popular or not popular. :lol:
:lol:

I didn't label it as popular or unpopular. You did!

This is yet another thread where people are forcing me to argue both sides. JORR and you are on opposite sides. It's my fault though.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41485
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
The far right wing approach to healthcare will work, if they just come out and say "Fuck it, some poor people are going to have to die". Just get it over with already....



I think one mechanical aspect to the healthcare debate that would clarify things would be if we stopped acting as if this is "insurance" when pre-existing conditions are covered. Insurance works by spreading risk. It simply can't cover pre-existing conditions. It would be as if I didn't need to buy auto insurance until after I got in an accident. This is a government program and we shouldn't hide from that. There's no shame in giving medical care to those who can't afford it. We do it already with Medicaid.


I agree on the "pre-existing" concept. Adults only though. Can't punish kids for parents being stupid. I mean "All Kids get Free Healthcare, no questions asked", that's something 90% of this country can get behind, correct?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:45 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80536
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
FavreFan wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Caller Bob wrote:
On the "right" vs "privilege" thing, I think there has to be a compromise. Between Bernie's "you get top notch healthcare, even if you are sitting at home, unemployed, not looking for a job" and Ted's "Tough Shit" approach.


If it's a clear case of someone that will die without treatment, the goverment has to step in and subsidize that. If you are dumb ass, aka young with a job and didn't buy healthcare, then if it's an 911, it will be debt you must resolve, like a student loan. Oh and yes, all kids deserve free healthcare, don't punish them for their parents inaction.

There has to be some middle ground here, no?


There are a lot of different issues you're touching on- practical, philosophical, political. if we forget about all existing structures, does the country- or the world- have enough resources for every person to be comfortable and relatively happy?


I would say we absolutely have the resources to offer every person a "reasonable" treatment plan for all medical conditions. Of course plans to oppose this, those wheels were set in motion decades ago under the Reagan administration when they fought Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I'm guessing that didn't get huge media attention at the time. :lol:


I don't know if you saw this, but Pelosi was on a campus taking student questions and this little gay twink got the mic and prefaced his question by saying that polling shows most Democrats under the age of 29 are actually anti-capitalist (interesting considering the prescriptions of LTG and other old school Dems for saving the party). She immediately started giggly dismissively and said, "Uh, okay, we're capitalists", as if that was some indisputable and unchangeable fact of life equal to Michael Jordan being the greatest basketball player ever.

It is.


Really? I doubt the U.S. will exist in its current political or economic form in another 100 years, but it's pretty pointless to argue about it since neither of us gets to say, "I told you so".

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 08, 2017 10:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41485
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
Example, around age 24, I rolled with no healthcare. This was like 12 years ago...I could have bought some. But I was healthy right? why not save $200-300 a month. 24 year old versions of me fuck the entire system up. Everyone does need to pool in to spread risk.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group