US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7074
| 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. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
On March 08 2017 06:39 ticklishmusic wrote: Actually, I'm surprised the GOP didn't pull a Bevin. He just shut down Kynect and forced people to go to healthcare.gov instead and declared victory over Obamacare... even though all he did was make people go to a different URL to find exchange coverage. Actually, it's a bit more ridiculous than that even. A lot of the benefits sites still use Kynect, they just redirect to it after the initial different URL. I feel like that's the best that the GOP could do and still claim victories, but I think the insurance companies want the ACA fixed, not just renamed. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On March 08 2017 06:55 LegalLord wrote: Just to put it to a poll. Poll: Republican healthcare bill: where do you stand? I dislike it more than not. (23) I like it more than not. (2) I am neutral about it. (2) 27 total votes Your vote: Republican healthcare bill: where do you stand? (Vote): I like it more than not. Well the results are pretty damning.., On_Slaught, which choice did you want? | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
it doesn't seem like it'd be worth the administrative hassle of getting through all these tweaks. every change to the system has a cost. they should just go forth and repeal the ACA, or admit they lied and don't. just pick a path and go with it. stupid (by which I mean dislikeable) politicians. I'm unsurprisingly disappointed. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:11 LegalLord wrote: Well the results are pretty damning.., On_Slaught, which choice did you want? Dislike it more than not. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On March 08 2017 06:08 Plansix wrote: I shovel this all back on congress being totally unwilling to regulate anything or give a shit.. These “smart” and everything else are consumer protection nightmares. And the tech industry gives literally zero shits and has not been forced to care at all. The BBC was doing a story about child pornography being shared on Facebook. They brought it to Facebook’s attention and Facebook reported the BBC for distributing child pornography. Uber is a living dumpster fire that has somehow managed to convince themselves that they drivers are their own businesses, but can't set their own prices or pick their passengers. Like I can’t even. You're reacting to a story on the government spying on people through smart devices by arguing that the government should regulate smart devices - presumably to protect against government hacking. Other problems on government regulating on new technology: - legislation takes time, technology moves fast; - legislators are prone to lobbying, larger firms push for legislation that favors them; - regulations are a tax - thus favor incumbents vs new entrants; - legislators are lawyers, do not understand technology; - we don't even yet know what the winning standards for IoT will be. Legislation passed now is likely to become obsolete fast; - legislation is often poorly thought out, creates negative unintended consequences; - regulation slows down innovation; - regulations cost money to monitor and enforce; - companies already have the incentive to protect customers from security/privacy breaches and the spread of child pornography. Not sure how extra regulation would change the already existing incentives. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
My favorite one. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:21 warding wrote: You're reacting to a story on the government spying on people through smart devices by arguing that the government should regulate smart devices - presumably to protect against government hacking. Other problems on government regulating on new technology: - legislation takes time, technology moves fast; - legislators are prone to lobbying, larger firms push for legislation that favors them; - regulations are a tax - thus favor incumbents vs new entrants; - legislators are lawyers, do not understand technology; - we don't even yet know what the winning standards for IoT will be. Legislation passed now is likely to become obsolete fast; - legislation is often poorly thought out, creates negative unintended consequences; - regulation slows down innovation; - regulations cost money to monitor and enforce; - companies already have the incentive to protect customers from security/privacy breaches and the spread of child pornography. Not sure how extra regulation would change the already existing incentives. The government needs a FISA warrant(or some due process) to spy on me and I don’t have a smart TV, so I’m pretty all set. I also do not give a fuck if someone can’t get VC investment because the government is regulating consumer products so random hackers can’t spy on people who just want to buy a TV. I don’t give a shit about anyone getting rich off of some dumb tech product like a smart trashcan or condom. And I could list an endless nubmer of things the tech industry does not understand, including ethics, liability and why long term planning is good. And regulation is supposed to slow shit down and make people think about the long term prospects of what they are doing. Which is the opposite of the tech industry right now. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23489 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:28 ShoCkeyy wrote: https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/839207060667498496 My favorite one. So Trumpcare is basically DOA, it will be Tea Party types that stop it, then Democrats will celebrate "their" win and move on from healthcare. Well played insurance companies, well played. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21963 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:55 GreenHorizons wrote: So Trumpcare is basically DOA, it will be Tea Party types that stop it, then Democrats will celebrate "their" win and move on from healthcare. Well played insurance companies, well played. The democrats will move on because there is nothing they can do when they have no power. The ACA staying is a best case scenario for the next 4 years because there is no way the Republicans will come forward with something better. It won't get better until the Democrats get a President + super majority. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:10 Nevuk wrote: Actually, it's a bit more ridiculous than that even. A lot of the benefits sites still use Kynect, they just redirect to it after the initial different URL. I feel like that's the best that the GOP could do and still claim victories, but I think the insurance companies want the ACA fixed, not just renamed. ayy lmao, it's even more of a fake victory than i thought. ty for info. on a serious note, yes, there are things that could improve the ACA for insurers, as well as consumers. they just don't happen to be sneakily eliminating the ACA carve out on deductions for insurance company executives like in the GOP plan. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23489 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:59 Gorsameth wrote: The democrats will move on because there is nothing they can do when they have no power. The ACA staying is a best case scenario for the next 4 years because there is no way the Republicans will come forward with something better. It won't get better until the Democrats get a President + super majority. That's why they are supposed to run on medicare for all, like Republicans ran on repealing Obamacare (except actually develop a plan). Fuck congressional Republicans, the house can get replaced every 2 years, let their constituents choose between Obamacare and Medicare for all, medicare for all wins in the polls hands down (it especially does a LOT better than Obamacare with Republicans). Instead it looks like they are going full "RUSSIA!?!" and "Not Trump", which won't win them anything in 2018. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21963 Posts
On March 08 2017 08:05 GreenHorizons wrote: That's why they are supposed to run on medicare for all, like Republicans ran on repealing Obamacare (except actually develop a plan). Fuck congressional Republicans, the house can get replaced every 2 years, let their constituents choose between Obamacare and Medicare for all, medicare for all wins in the polls hands down (it especially does a LOT better than Obamacare with Republicans). Instead it looks like they are going full "RUSSIA!?!" and "Not Trump", which won't win them anything in 2018. Winning the house does nothing when no Democratic healthcare bill will make it through the Senate or the Presidency. And you will have to work very hard to convince me that they could even win the House on a 'medicare for all' campaign, let alone the super majority they need to break the inevitable filibuster. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23489 Posts
On March 08 2017 08:09 Gorsameth wrote: Winning the house does nothing when no Democratic healthcare bill will make it through the Senate or the Presidency. And you will have to work very hard to convince me that they could even win the House on a 'medicare for all' campaign, let alone the super majority they need to break the inevitable filibuster. Winning the house is step 1. Winning any branch of government is rather fruitless without the other branches. But winning the house would give Democrats the power of the purse. It would win some seats in the senate in 2018 as well, then in 2020 it's a simple, you want guaranteed healthcare for you and your kids? Vote Democrat. You want to lose your health coverage and potentially go bankrupt from medical bills, you vote Republican. Then Republicans have to fight not just the ACA (which they have got the country evenly split on) but instead they have to fight medicare (not for all) which has ridiculous approval ratings. Democrats would already be 10 points ahead on Medicare for all, they would have to work pretty hard to lose that fight. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
On March 08 2017 07:35 Plansix wrote: The government needs a FISA warrant(or some due process) to spy on me and I don’t have a smart TV, so I’m pretty all set. I also do not give a fuck if someone can’t get VC investment because the government is regulating consumer products so random hackers can’t spy on people who just want to buy a TV. I don’t give a shit about anyone getting rich off of some dumb tech product like a smart trashcan or condom. And I could list an endless nubmer of things the tech industry does not understand, including ethics, liability and why long term planning is good. And regulation is supposed to slow shit down and make people think about the long term prospects of what they are doing. Which is the opposite of the tech industry right now. I see your attempt at trivializing the societal benefits of tech innovation but may I counter that 30k Americans die in road accidents every year and that advances in IoT and smart car technology could save these people? Off the top off my head, smart wearables for healthcare are another IoT vertical that could save many lives. Every extra day that passes because we need to 'slow down to think things through' results in more avoidable deaths. You've also ignored all my points on the likely ineffectiveness of legislating on this. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
| ||