US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2128

On July 24 2015 09:36 Plansix wrote:

Expecting the invisible hand of the free market to control healthcare costs when the consumer isn't even aware of what is being charged for the services is pure myth. Expecting the consumer to make informed decisions when they have almost zero information is why the free market argument for healthcare is hilarious.

Nothing beat the NPR story where they tried to get a quote for the cost of an MRI. Took them over a week to get a single price from one hospital. People in the ER asking "hey, how much do you charge for a blood transfusion here? I might want to be moved to a cheaper ER. Please get me quotes from all the local ERs on all my treatments for the next week. Thanks."

On July 24 2015 09:43 always_winter wrote:
Cuba and Iran really aren't analogous. Cuba was merely a pawn for the Soviet Union during the Cold War; unfortunate collateral damage during a conflict in which it personally had very little at stake. It is extremely promising that ties are finally being renewed between Cuba and the West, and the Cuban people may be released from the sins of their fathers.

Iran, on the other hand, is a rising and dominant power in the Middle East. It's America in the Western Hemisphere during the nineteenth century, except it's even more volatile and unpredictable as it's operating without the assurance of regional hegemony. You'd think we would've learned from our own mistakes; to be able to predict Iran's motives and understand it could never accept nuclear impotence.

To answer your question, war is not the answer. Heavy sanctions, like those currently in place and perhaps even greater, are necessary to severely limit Iran until a more progressive regime, more representative of a constituency I fully believe to be rapidly modernizing and aligning with more rational values, takes power and finds common ground with the West. Now is not that time. We cannot force history. We certainly shouldn't willingly repeat it, but such is our fate.

On July 24 2015 09:43 always_winter wrote:
Edit: Ahmadinejad made it his top priority to propel Iran to nuclear power. Iran remains without nuclear weapons. If you think the sanctions don't work, I'd also invite you to study the Iranian economy since their implementation. There's a reason the innocent masses are rejoicing in the streets, and it's not all propaganda. I'd also invite you to study Khomeini, then truly ask yourself if he will be abandoning nuclear development for a decade under the new deal.

On July 24 2015 09:56 ragz_gt wrote:



No one would dispute that sanction ruined Iran economy, on the other hand it did very little stop them from developing nuke, which is why we are here now.

You are confusing Iranian citizen with people who are actually interested in making a bomb. The sactions matters for former, but very little to latter as they can just take food from others. It's like when Chinese made the bomb, the slogan literally was "would rather have bomb than eat", and it sure was not top government officials who were starving.

To answer your question below, M.A.D. is the answer. If you think they're already on the brink of a nuclear breakthrough, and I'd tend to agree, then what is a piece of paper going to do to stop religious fanatics from exacting their will. I'd like to think they'd still act rationally as a state actor, particularly when annihilation is at stake. Nothing in this world is perfect. Sanctioning a nuclear program isn't the best option either. I place myself in the camp advocating it's the best alternative. Ultimately what I'm saying is Iran won't abandon nuclear ambition; they'll simply be better at hiding it. In that regard we'd be best suited to limit their capacity, rather than trust their leaders with whom we have nothing in common

On July 24 2015 09:39 ragz_gt wrote:


I agree healthcare in US is messed up. Lived in multiple countries, the quality of care US healthcare has is by far the best, but the system is by far the worst. On the other hand I don't really have any idea how to fix it so I stay out of that argument. I was just replying to Danglars who somehow think religion should weigh more than government oversight.

On July 24 2015 10:45 Danglars wrote:
Oh, I don't doubt there's a comparison of religions here. Plansix simply has more faith in one method than another. The only trouble is he thinks free market decisions ... actually choosing from a field ... is the false religion and the better one is Experts (!!!) choosing for you, managing those tricky costs and alternatives. Now, I have very little beef with a fanatic against market choices, provided he acknowledges his blind faith in bureaucratic insight. It seems, so sadly, people in Plansix's sense exalt their chosen faith beyond rational analysis. It cannot be questioned; all other plans may be.

On July 24 2015 10:32 always_winter wrote:
To be honest I think the best counter-argument is the effect economic sanctions have on anti-Western ideology; as a vehicle driving opposition to the West which becomes indoctrinated and handed down from generation to generation. In that regard it's hard to find common ground with people who have been taught to hate you, but not impossible.

The internet is a magnificent beast. The unprecedented flow of information is an invaluable source of inter-cultural understanding and genuine human progression. I think a progressive movement is already taking root in Iran, not only in spite of these sanctions but BECAUSE of these sanctions, coupled with the age of information which has allowed them to see this world absent a jaded lens. I believe we're best suited to wait for our contemporaries to take power, rather than force history upon the unwilling and risk the consequences.

Edit: Israel is perhaps the most unwilling of all state actors, an intricate piece of the puzzle which has already choreographed air strikes in the event of American abandonment and Iranian nuclear achievement.

I'd also add to that point, as clarification, that I believe the sanctions, from so many thriving Western nations, are fueling revolutionary thought processes within Iranian youth, in which they understand the extreme limitations of a reclusive state and wish to participate on the world stage. I believe they see a commonality among global youth and a common ground from which to leap forward. In that regard I'm an optimist. In a million others I'm a dedicated pessimist. But yea, you raise a valid point and it's easily the best counter argument, but we live in an age capable of overcoming generational indoctrination.

Below is another valid point, but think anti-establishment Germans during the Nazi regime. I'd be hesitant to draw too many parallels, but it certainly illustrates the point that reason can overcome indoctrination and propaganda, and we have far more tools at our disposal to do so now as opposed to the 1930's.

On July 24 2015 13:06 ticklishmusic wrote:
Remember the thing Obama said about how the negotiators didn't bring up the captive Americans in Iran? They didn't want to tie the nuclear deal to anything else and given Iran more bargaining chips. In my view, they applied the same thing to Iran sponsoring all sorts of extremist groups. Focus on the nuclear issue, negotiate from a position of strength. Don't put more stuff on the table and let Iran trade a few pawns for a knight.

On July 24 2015 12:41 Mercy13 wrote:


Can you provide a link to a non-proliferation expert who thinks the deal is bad? I haven't been able to find a single one.

The key points to consider when evaluating the deal are:
1. The sanctions slowed down Iran's nuclear program, but could not stop it completely. Without a deal the only way to prevent Iran from getting nukes would have been a war.
2. Keeping the sanctions on depended upon the support of the international community, particularly the UN and the EU. If we had not accepted a deal which the rest of the world views in a very favorable light, we would have lost that support. Most of the sanctions would have been lifted, and Iran would get to have its cake and eat it too (i.e., no sanctions, and an unfettered nuclear program)
3. If it looks like Iran is cheating, we can reimpose the sanctions with a relatively short delay, something like 30 days, with no ability for Russia or China or anyone else to block it.

The only criticism of the deal that I find credible is that it doesn't do anything to prevent Iran from continuing its nonsense in the Mideast, such as funding terrorist groups. However, from a purely non-proliferation perspective, it seems like the best deal we could have hoped for.

Anyway, I wonder if the GOP's blustering actually helped the negotiators?

Kerry: "Iran, I know your position on this point is reasonable, and I'd really just LOVE to give in on it, but you've heard all the screaming from the wingnuts in Congress right? If you don't give in on this, they will kill the deal no matter how stupid it would be to do so."

A man opened fire inside a movie theater in a Lafayette, Louisiana, multiplex, Thursday night, killing two people and wounding seven others -- before taking his own life.

"There's nothing to believe that there was any kind of motive," said Col. Michael Edmonson of the Louisiana State Police.

The shooter was a 58-year-old white man who was a theater patron, police said. Authorities have his name but are withholding it as the investigation continues.

The shooting took place shortly before 8:30 p.m ET at the Grand Theatre 16 in Lafayette, a city of about 120,000 people, 60 miles west of Baton Rouge.

About 100 people were inside the theater for a screening of the comedy, "Trainwreck," when the shooter began firing using a handgun, police said.