US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7177
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. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
![]()
KwarK
United States42787 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:10 Trainrunnef wrote: Part of me hopes it will pass just so that everyone will be able to experience just how bad this plan is rather than complain about how it would have worked if only.... It's the problem with the modern voter. They have no idea how things got to be as good as they are today. The new default is $4 electronics in Walmart, global peace, breathable air, not dying of smallpox etc etc. So when one party says that trade deficits are bad, that NATO needs to be changed, that the EPA needs to be stopped, that vaccines cause autism and so forth then people somehow fail to connect the things that they like which they assume were always there with the policies that will destroy them. If the Democrats gave the Republicans support for the Republican wish list, flat taxes, no medicare/medicaid, no environmental regulations, undoing the equal rights act, no social security, no protections for minorities/gays, no labour laws, no minimum wage, no social services, no antitrust laws etc for just one term then we could probably get decades of Democratic domination out of it before the next generation that don't get it decide to try the Republicans again. It's the Trump voters who depend on benefits who stand around going "well I knew he was going to cut benefits but I didn't think it'd be my benefits". | ||
![]()
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
| ||
Trainrunnef
United States599 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:20 KwarK wrote: It's the problem with the modern voter. They have no idea how things got to be as good as they are today. The new default is $4 electronics in Walmart, global peace, breathable air, not dying of smallpox etc etc. So when one party says that trade deficits are bad, that NATO needs to be changed, that the EPA needs to be stopped, that vaccines cause autism and so forth then people somehow fail to connect the things that they like which they assume were always there with the policies that will destroy them. If the Democrats gave the Republicans support for the Republican wish list, flat taxes, no medicare/medicaid, no environmental regulations, undoing the equal rights act, no social security, no protections for minorities/gays, no labour laws, no minimum wage, no social services, no antitrust laws etc for just one term then we could probably get decades of Democratic domination out of it before the next generation that don't get it decide to try the Republicans again. It's the Trump voters who depend on benefits who stand around going "well I knew he was going to cut benefits but I didn't think it'd be my benefits". I think democratic voters do the same thing. Only instead of expecting someone to cut "the other guy's benefits" they assume that their key entitlements will be there till kingdom come and never show up at the polls when it counts during midterm elections. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
LightSpectra
United States1542 Posts
| ||
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:02 LegalLord wrote: That actually sounds like a Pandora's box worth opening. If the US's healthcare has to be shitty to subsidize better healthcare in the rest of the world, perhaps it's time for an arrangement to be opened up that makes other nations contribute more strongly to drugs that help them. Mind you, proliferation of life-saving inexpensive treatments is probably far more important to general well-being, if not the future of medicine, than expensive high-end treatments. Medicine is a field where preventative treatment massively reduces the overall cost of treatment. As I argued before, I am quite sure if we had a scenario where all low-level treatments are done for free but for anything that can't really be afforded you just die, then we would probably be healthier overall than with the status quo. I believe this has been brought up before, but proportionally the US does not more on medical R&D than the rest of first world nations. I think the numbers are around 0.8% to 1.2% of GDP for medical research, and the US is somewhere in the upper half of that. And most of those other nations have national healthcare. Sure, the US contributes a large amount more than the rest of the world, but that's basically because it has a shit ton more money overall. | ||
ZerOCoolSC2
8986 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:20 KwarK wrote: It's the Trump voters who depend on benefits who stand around going "well I knew he was going to cut benefits but I didn't think it'd be my benefits". This. This so fucking much. There needs to be accountability for people who do this kind of shit. You not only harm yourselves by naive voting and below standard knowledge of any given policy, but you literally harm millions more. I don't think I can take hearing someone complain if they get their wish for ACA to be repealed and replace with something worse. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:27 LightSpectra wrote: I was amazed to learn recently that the USA isn't even in the top 10 of the most litigious companies in the world. Apparently Germany is. Do any Germans here think their country is a litigious hellhole? It depends on how quickly their cases are resolved and the rules. Lots of things are "litigation". A utility lien is litigation in some states. I would need to see that metric, because court cases on their own are not bad. Small claims cases normally work out fine. Evictions are a necessary evil, but mostly end in repayment plans or settlement of some sort(depending on the state). | ||
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:27 LightSpectra wrote: I was amazed to learn recently that the USA isn't even in the top 10 of the most litigious companies in the world. Apparently Germany is. Do any Germans here think their country is a litigious hellhole? Those numbers don't actually account for what the court system actually looks like, though. It just counts the number of lawsuits, and doesn't say anything about what kind of lawsuits, time spent in court, costs incurred, etc. | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
Don't worry folks - nothing to see here! Manafort did not do what he said he did in those memos, he was only a minor advisor to Trump, and he did not receive those secret payments from Ukraine! | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
All this for a terrible bill that won’t make it out of the senate. | ||
Gorsameth
Netherlands21709 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:55 Plansix wrote: And the reports of arm twisting for the freedom caucus are coming it. Expect to hear about all the promises Trump is going to make to force them to pass this bill. I’ve already seen some reports about holding our relationship with Cuba hostage to switch a vote. All this for a terrible bill that won’t make it out of the senate. The more political capital Trump expends over this non-sense the better it is for everyone. | ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 23 2017 02:57 Gorsameth wrote: The more political capital Trump expends over this non-sense the better it is for everyone. can one borrow political capital and then declare political capital bankruptcy to avoid repayment? | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On March 23 2017 03:03 ticklishmusic wrote: can one borrow political capital and then declare political capital bankruptcy to avoid repayment? probably. but in general I'd say people are quite wary of loaning political capital; especially as your collateral can become worthless if you become too toxic to be associated with. you don't declare bankruptcy in a conventional sense, you simply become worthless (or worse) as an ally and are unable to pay anything back. or you could declare bankruptcy and refuse to pay back political favors, which basically means noone is willing to work with you at all (and you may've acquired a number of powerful enemies). | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On March 23 2017 03:07 zlefin wrote: probably. but in general I'd say people are quite wary of loaning political capital; especially as your collateral can become worthless if you become too toxic to be associated with. you don't declare bankruptcy in a conventional sense, you simply become worthless (or worse) as an ally and are unable to pay anything back. or you could declare bankruptcy and refuse to pay back political favors, which basically means noone is willing to work with you at all (and you may've acquired a number of powerful enemies). it was a joking comment, but i appreciate the fleshed out analogy of political and financial worth. ![]() | ||
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On March 23 2017 03:03 ticklishmusic wrote: can one borrow political capital and then declare political capital bankruptcy to avoid repayment? I read somewhere that the way this ends is Trump retiring by declaring moral bankruptcy and thinking it will all go away ![]() | ||
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
On March 23 2017 03:08 Doodsmack wrote: Bankruptcy comes in the form of blaming Democrats and saying you have a strategy to "let Obamacare die from its own weight". well both the CBO and Krugman both think that's not going to turn out so well for them. really the best way for Trump to handle this is to do what Arnold did in 2005 and give a positive speech about working together and how we need to make things better. Trump has like 0 credibility with that though. Arnold eventually got anti gerrymandering stuff passed and moved on to Climate change. Trump's signature legislation ideas like infrastructure are probably dead now. good luck getting support from anyone on that. | ||
pmh
1352 Posts
So trump was right,more or less. I already found it very unlikely that he would make those accusations without having at least some ground for it. | ||
| ||