| 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. | ||
|
JumboJohnson
537 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:14 Plansix wrote: Its needs 60 votes in the senate to overcome a filibuster, which will never happen. I thought they could pass it through reconciliation and only need a majority. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:17 JumboJohnson wrote: I thought they could pass it through reconciliation and only need a majority. I am not sure that will work. My understanding of reconciliation is that is would defund the ACA through budget changes, but not create new laws. That would avoid the filibuster, but wouldn't allow them to get rid of the mandate or create new systems. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States2842 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On March 10 2017 02:33 Gahlo wrote: Love me some horseshoe theory. Just another example of it at work. ive got a theory for you: the horseshoe is a complete historical anomaly and its shape is an illusion. it's actually a straight line that runs from the political at one end to an apolitical fukuyamaist consumerism at the other end. the horseshoe bend is a mirage produced by an aesthetic identity apolitics that appears to have extension within a real political dimension (hence the 2d horseshoe) but actually does not. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
The political solution of cutting off their nose to spite their face. Or "We love recessions". | ||
|
NovaTheFeared
United States7232 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:21 Plansix wrote: I am not sure that will work. My understanding of reconciliation is that is would defund the ACA through budget changes, but not create new laws. That would avoid the filibuster, but wouldn't allow them to get rid of the mandate or create new systems. I thought the mandate was removable via reconciliation because it is a tax and thus under the scope as a scorable budget item. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On March 10 2017 02:19 Danglars wrote: Anyone still shocked. He said in confirmation hearings that the degree of human impact is subject to continuing debate. Breaking news: the actual statement said Or almost exactly what was said before. Sometimes, I think the new drug is outrage and you all are addicts. here's the full article on it from Reuters: www.reuters.com EPA chief says Congress should weigh whether carbon dioxide is a pollutant [...] I can understand the outrage tbh. Going as far as to say you don't even consider it a pollutant in the first place is quite ridiculous and unsettling. Idk what it was for you guys in the US but as someone looking from the outside I don't know the guy too well, I knew that he's a climate change denier and I knew he (as anyone appointed by Trump) would try his best to undo anything and everything related to it but this is a lot more than I personally ever thought would happen. So yeah, for me him going that far is still a massive shock because at the back of my head I at least always had that idea "well, he wouldn't be THAT crazy.... right?", turns out he is. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:27 IgnE wrote: ive got a theory for you: the horseshoe is a complete historical anomaly and its shape is an illusion. it's actually a straight line that runs from the political at one end to an apolitical fukuyamaist consumerism at the other end. the horseshoe bend is a mirage produced by an aesthetic identity apolitics that appears to have extension within a real political dimension (hence the 2d horseshoe) but actually does not. You changed the image a little but the underlying horseshoe logic still seems to apply. You're saying that both the left and the right are a return to the 'political' while the establishment/center/whatever manages in administrative fashion. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:39 NovaTheFeared wrote: I thought the mandate was removable via reconciliation because it is a tax and thus under the scope as a scorable budget item. They might be able to adjust the amount of the tax if you don’t have insurance? I know they can’t remove the pre-existing conditions clause or much of the structure of the ACA. It was a terrible plan, much like using the debt ceiling as political leverage. It is short sighted and the opposite of governing. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States2842 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:43 Toadesstern wrote: here's the full article on it from Reuters: www.reuters.com I can understand the outrage tbh. Going as far as to say you don't even consider it a pollutant in the first place is quite ridiculous and unsettling. Idk what it was for you guys in the US but as someone looking from the outside I don't know the guy too well, I knew that he's a climate change denier and I knew he (as anyone appointed by Trump) would try his best to undo anything and everything related to it but this is a lot more than I personally ever thought would happen. So yeah, for me him going that far is still a massive shock because at the back of my head I at least always had that idea "well, he wouldn't be THAT crazy.... right?", turns out he is. I would really like it if the EU and other first-world countries banded together to protest/sanction America's environmental damage to the world. I mean if the USA had trucks that regularly drove into Canada, dumped a ton of waste, and drove back while ignoring any border controls, it would be an international incident. If we had boats that regularly sailed to Europe or Japan and regularly dumped waste on their shores, it would be an international incident. So why isn't it equally bad that we're polluting their airspace? The only difference is the crap isn't being dispersed at ground level. Of course it will never happen, just a thought experiment. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:17 JumboJohnson wrote: I thought they could pass it through reconciliation and only need a majority. Budget reconciliation baby. Not subject to filibuster. And guess why the GOP is attracted to this idea. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:02 LegalLord wrote: I think it's moot since it would take a miracle for this plan to pass. It's uniting America! ... against the plan. On March 10 2017 03:43 Toadesstern wrote: here's the full article on it from Reuters: www.reuters.com I can understand the outrage tbh. Going as far as to say you don't even consider it a pollutant in the first place is quite ridiculous and unsettling. Idk what it was for you guys in the US but as someone looking from the outside I don't know the guy too well, I knew that he's a climate change denier and I knew he (as anyone appointed by Trump) would try his best to undo anything and everything related to it but this is a lot more than I personally ever thought would happen. So yeah, for me him going that far is still a massive shock because at the back of my head I at least always had that idea "well, he wouldn't be THAT crazy.... right?", turns out he is. Remember, traditional definitions of pollutants are lung irritants ... picture smog. Now, people are expanding the definition to mean things safe to breathe in. So the section specifically isn't ridiculous or unsettling on its face. The flip side is the court and others attempts to expand pollution to include things like greenhouse gases, is (famously) farts and Frisbees can be considered as pollutants. So it's in line with everything we heard in the nomination and confirmation process. It's only breaking news if Kim Jong Il touring farms qualifies as "North Korea says/does surprising and alarming thing." | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 10 2017 02:49 LightSpectra wrote: I still don't follow why Ryan would want to destroy Trump for passing his healthcare bill. Are you suggesting the AHCA is some kind of Machiavellian plot to make Pence president? How does Ryan benefit from that? To an Ayn Rand devotee faux policy wonk like Paul Ryan the bill probably seems like a brilliant idea. My original belief that "the GOP couldn't possibly be dumb enough to repeal Obamacare and replace it with nothing/ garbage" is really being put to the test. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On March 10 2017 03:43 Toadesstern wrote: here's the full article on it from Reuters: www.reuters.com I can understand the outrage tbh. Going as far as to say you don't even consider it a pollutant in the first place is quite ridiculous and unsettling. Idk what it was for you guys in the US but as someone looking from the outside I don't know the guy too well, I knew that he's a climate change denier and I knew he (as anyone appointed by Trump) would try his best to undo anything and everything related to it but this is a lot more than I personally ever thought would happen. So yeah, for me him going that far is still a massive shock because at the back of my head I at least always had that idea "well, he wouldn't be THAT crazy.... right?", turns out he is. We America people basically knew he would be that crazy. Lobbyists pay good money for utter bullshit of the useful variety. | ||
|
Ayaz2810
United States2763 Posts
On a side note, there's something about his face I don't like. He just looks like an evil bastard. I thought that the moment I saw a pic of him. Anyone else? | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 10 2017 04:11 LegalLord wrote: We America people basically knew he would be that crazy. Lobbyists pay good money for utter bullshit of the useful variety. I think there were enough people (in this thread, even) promising that Trump actually had a plan, was not as stupid as he seemed during the election, and would be tempered by him picking the "best" people in his cabinet to advise him. I'm sure there is a good deal of schadenfreude in discovering he and his advisors really are just idiots. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Serral vs Bunny
ByuN vs GgMaChine
CranKy Ducklings
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Jaedong
YSC vs hero
RSL Revival
Solar vs Rogue
Maru vs NightMare
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
