EPTI am interested to see if this does anything to McConnell's campaign with his CM being involved in a bribery scandal.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1256
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24507 Posts
I am interested to see if this does anything to McConnell's campaign with his CM being involved in a bribery scandal. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On August 29 2014 03:46 Sub40APM wrote: really? there are municipalities or whatever that run on drafting citizens to be temporary executive-legislators? In other things: Obama's deafening silence on the Russian invasion of Ukraine isnt particularly surprising, the deeper Russia goes and the more money it wastes the ultimately weaker -- and less popular abroad and in Ukraine it becomes -- but still, it took Lithuania to convene the UNSC. A few are researching and testing it; more at the lower levels of town government, like the stuff handled by committees or some such; I'm not that clear on the details, and a lot of it has just appeared in the last couple decades as experimental programs I think. But they show promise. I've always wanted to know if appointed judges on average have higher or lower job approval ratings than elected judges. | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
WASHINGTON -- Pennsylvania agreed to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act on Thursday, joining 26 states and the District of Columbia. Federal regulators accepted a modified proposal from Gov. Tom Corbett (R) that will offer an estimated 500,000 low-income individuals subsidies to purchase private insurance. The plan allows some low-income individuals to be charged premiums for coverage, and permits the number of available benefit plans to be reduced from 14 to two -- a "high-risk" option and "low-risk" options -- according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Marilyn B. Tavenner lauded the agreement in a statement, and urged other states to expand Medicaid as well. Corbett is only the 9th Republican governor to sign on. “Like we are doing in Pennsylvania, HHS and CMS are committed to supporting state flexibility and working with states on innovative solutions that work within the confines of the law to expand Medicaid to low-income individuals," Tavenner said. "But, unfortunately, millions of Americans are still without Medicaid coverage because their state has yet to act." Source | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
To start things off, the CBO says the deficit this year will be $506 billion, or 2.9 percent of GDP. In 2013 it was $680 billion, so that’s a pretty steep drop. And in terms of GDP, not only is that slightly lower than the average deficit of the last 40 years (3.1 percent), it’s also a 70 percent decline from Obama’s first year in office, where because of the Great Recession, which brought both the need for more spending and a plunge in tax revenues, the deficit peaked at 9.8 percent of GDP. But but but the Negro Communist Muslim Infiltrator was going to bankrupt America! | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24507 Posts
On August 29 2014 06:13 Sub40APM wrote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/08/27/yes-obamacare-is-cutting-the-deficit/?tid=rssfeed But but but the Negro Communist Muslim Infiltrator was going to bankrupt America! I have a feeling Obama's presidency will be similar to the Civil War (or as some know it The War of Northern Aggression). There will be 2 completely different accounts of what happened, why, and who to blame for what. Seeing as how over 100 years later we still have cable news outlets saying Lincoln could of just waited for the south to free slaves on their own and saved lives and money, I doubt it will be resolved any time soon. People who want Obama to be the worst president are going to believe it no matter what. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
Two months ago, James Tomsheck was pushed out of his job as internal affairs chief for U.S. Customs and Border Protection. At the time, authorities criticized him for not doing enough to investigate abuse and corruption. But now Tomsheck tells a very different story: about a culture that goes out of its way to evade legal restraints. Use of force by law enforcement agents along the Southwest border has drawn attention and criticism recently, after reports that Border Patrol agents shot and killed unarmed migrants and faced no consequences. Since 2010, 28 people have been killed by agents and officers. Tomsheck says he believes about a quarter of the incidents are highly suspicious. "I believe the system was clearly engineered to interfere with our efforts to hold the Border Patrol accountable," he says. When asked how that could happen, he responded: "Some persons in leadership positions in the Border Patrol were either fabricating or distorting information to give the outward appearance that it was an appropriate use of lethal force when in fact it was not." Things like exaggerating the threat an unarmed migrant posed, he says. Or claiming a migrant was on the U.S. side of the border, when he was actually in Mexico. And in describing how Border Protection leaders forced him out after eight years on the job, Tomsheck doesn't mince words: "I think there's every indication that my removal from the position ... was an effort to identify a scapegoat." A scapegoat, he says, to silence criticism that few, if any, agents face justice for killing unarmed migrants on the border. Source | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
When asked how that could happen, he responded: "Some persons in leadership positions in the Border Patrol were either fabricating or distorting information to give the outward appearance that it was an appropriate use of lethal force when in fact it was not." Things like exaggerating the threat an unarmed migrant posed, he says. Or claiming a migrant was on the U.S. side of the border, when he was actually in Mexico. What the heck. Has this actually happened? Even shooting through borders is highly unusual, killing someone on the other side is basically unheard of outside of conflict zones. | ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On August 29 2014 03:28 Nyxisto wrote: + Show Spoiler + Well it's mostly semantics, but I don't think "direct democracy" doesn't even make sense as a term. + Show Spoiler + Switzerland is actually a good example of how too much "democracy" can take the wrong turn. A few years ago Switzerland banned minarets, which in my opinion hurts the rights of Muslims to practise their religion, which apparently doesn't seem to be part of their constitutional rights. A few months ago Switzerland had a successful vote about limiting immigration, which hurts existing treaties with the EU and has led to the Erasmus program being stopped for Swiss students. And although the influence of lobbyism in the US looks scary, I don't think that Americans have "little choice", at least compared to most other Western nations, the ideological gap between the Republican and Democratic party seems really huge. Here in Germany our two biggest parties at this point virtually do the same thing, and represent like 80% of the population. I don't think that it has turned the country into being not very democratic. I guess our disagreement is I think of democracy as an ideological category, without a value judgement necessarily attached. More democratic != more just/nice. Like most other ideological categories, I think just going for a "pure" version of the concept leads to problems. Pure capitalism is anarchy, pure socialism is tyranny. Pure cleanliness is OCD, pure not-giving-a-shit-about-cleanliness is slovenliness. Sure, there with each of these, there is a pole you want to be closer to. But being at the far end leads to absurdity and nonsense. Switzerland in paticular is an interesting example. It's a very well run state in many ways. Pacifism, amorality, and an educated populace have combined with direct democracy to make a pleasant, prosperous state. But yes, there are tradeoffs to the increase in democracy. The oppression of Muslims and general xenophobia are pretty popular in Europe right now. This means you get weird populist policies on these issues sometimes. More direct democracies are more prone to it. On August 29 2014 03:46 Sub40APM wrote: really? there are municipalities or whatever that run on drafting citizens to be temporary executive-legislators? Ancient Athens did this for their Council. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boule_(ancient_Greece)#The_Athenian_Boule On the direct democracy point, they also exiled somebody every year without having to try them for anything. Idea was to get rid of divisive figures. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism | ||
|
jellyjello
Korea (South)664 Posts
On August 29 2014 06:13 Sub40APM wrote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2014/08/27/yes-obamacare-is-cutting-the-deficit/?tid=rssfeed But but but the Negro Communist Muslim Infiltrator was going to bankrupt America! Ever bothered to read the rest of the CBO report? Particularly concerning the assertion that the national debt will continue to soar due in part to Obamacare? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
On August 29 2014 00:56 Nyxisto wrote: I'm not saying you're wrong but it's not like 'the people' have shown to be super smart about when to go to war and when not to either. It's not like it has taken a lot of effort in the past to sent millions of people into war for all kinds of stupid shit. Also on democracy: Democracy is more than just voting. It's also about freedom, prosperity and all that kind of stuff. That you can't vote for Stalinists or theocratic nutjobs doesn't make your country less democratic. If it's all about how many choices you have then having a vote about who's head we chop off next would by that definition make a country more democratic. I think one of the strongest indicators on how well a democracy functions is how well it protects their minorities. These groups of people are often the first that can pack their bags when the "true leaders of the people" get into office. Yeah as long as those minorities include the rich elite (to the exclusion of the others) then you basically have every Western democracy at present. Despite what you may think from listening to American media, there isn't much difference between how Republican and Democratic presidents actually behave in office. Sure, there are some differences between the tea party and the more left elements of the democrats, but those differences don't actually get translated into policy or legislation. On August 29 2014 06:26 GreenHorizons wrote: I have a feeling Obama's presidency will be similar to the Civil War (or as some know it The War of Northern Aggression). There will be 2 completely different accounts of what happened, why, and who to blame for what. Seeing as how over 100 years later we still have cable news outlets saying Lincoln could of just waited for the south to free slaves on their own and saved lives and money, I doubt it will be resolved any time soon. People who want Obama to be the worst president are going to believe it no matter what. Oh come on. Lincoln didn't start the Civil War to free the slaves. He could have done that without declaring war first. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On August 29 2014 10:57 IgnE wrote: Despite what you may think from listening to American media, there isn't much difference between how Republican and Democratic presidents actually behave in office. Sure, there are some differences between the tea party and the more left elements of the democrats, but those differences don't actually get translated into policy or legislation. Well compared to most other Western countries the right and left wing spectrum in the US surely look quite different. Our two biggest parties here in Germany which probably represent like 80% of the people don't even differ as much as the Democrats or the Republicans in themselves. I also don't think that's a big problem, we've basically had it all over the last 80 years and as it turns out the social democratic route turned out better than all the alternatives. What kind of political currents do you think aren't represented in the US? | ||
|
ragz_gt
9172 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
On August 29 2014 11:23 Nyxisto wrote: Well compared to most other Western countries the right and left wing spectrum in the US surely look quite different. Our two biggest parties here in Germany which probably represent like 80% of the people don't even differ as much as the Democrats or the Republicans in themselves. I also don't think that's a big problem, we've basically had it all over the last 80 years and as it turns out the social democratic route turned out better than all the alternatives. What kind of political currents do you think aren't represented in the US? Our "left-wing" party passed a pro-insurance healthcare mandate that is being attacked for being "socialist." Single-payer systems weren't even on the table and you are asking me "what political currents" I think aren't represented? | ||
|
jellyjello
Korea (South)664 Posts
On August 29 2014 11:51 IgnE wrote: Our "left-wing" party passed a pro-insurance healthcare mandate that is being attacked for being "socialist." Single-payer systems weren't even on the table and you are asking me "what political currents" I think aren't represented? I am not sure if you seriously think that single payer systems would work in the country which leads the world in obesity and whose government is filled with numerous bureaucratic layers. I am a firm believer that a federal owned universal health care systems is bound to fail due to the budget constraints. I will, however, consider a state owned health care systems. | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
On August 29 2014 10:35 jellyjello wrote: Ever bothered to read the rest of the CBO report? Particularly concerning the assertion that the national debt will continue to soar due in part to Obamacare? Yes, way to move the goal posts. First Obama care was supposed to bankrupt America within his presidency while at the same time completely failing. Now it will bankrupt America sometime in the distant future. But hey, as long as you believe then what do you need facts for, anyone can prove anything with facts! | ||
|
Introvert
United States5093 Posts
On August 29 2014 12:44 Sub40APM wrote: Yes, way to move the goal posts. First Obama care was supposed to bankrupt America within his presidency while at the same time completely failing. Now it will bankrupt America sometime in the distant future. But hey, as long as you believe then what do you need facts for, anyone can prove anything with facts! I don't recall anyone saying that- in fact, since it was pointed out numerous times that many of the taxes and fees kicked in before the full law was implemented, those fees and the like would push back the costs of the bill until a later time. Whether or not it's failing is another discussion, but I don't count increasing costs disguised by massive subsidies to be marks of a particularly successful system. But I said I wouldn't talk about that... | ||
|
coverpunch
United States2093 Posts
On August 29 2014 12:44 Sub40APM wrote: Yes, way to move the goal posts. First Obama care was supposed to bankrupt America within his presidency while at the same time completely failing. Now it will bankrupt America sometime in the distant future. But hey, as long as you believe then what do you need facts for, anyone can prove anything with facts! To be fair, Obama was supposed to Hope and Change all our problems away into a V-shaped recovery so that right now all Americans would have health care, the economy would be buzzing, unemployment would be back below 5%, the deficit would be a surplus paying down the national debt, and everyone in the world would love Americans so much that they'd stop fighting wars with other people. Most importantly, politics in Washington would be clean, fair, and bipartisan. Now the rallying cry is "everything would be better if it weren't for Republicans with their obstructionism and dirty Koch money". | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7684 Posts
On August 29 2014 12:37 jellyjello wrote: I am not sure if you seriously think that single payer systems would work in the country which leads the world in obesity and whose government is filled with numerous bureaucratic layers. I am a firm believer that a federal owned universal health care systems is bound to fail due to the budget constraints. I will, however, consider a state owned health care systems. I am not sure if you seriously think that a system that works in dozens and dozens of other countries with numerous bureaucratic layers and even more inverted population pyramids than the United States wouldn't work here also. Your belief has no basis in empirical fact. | ||
| ||
