ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2020 elections , Bernie Sanders , presidential candidates

Reply
Old 27th February 2019, 04:51 PM   #321
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
But then, instead of having your property seized, would you truly be better off if you simply got stuck on a waiting list waiting for health care? It does happen... I have a cousin who injured his shoulder playing hockey and it took months to arrange an MRI (despite the fact that such things could be done in a week in the U.S. That's months of unnecessary pain.)
Yes, I'd be better off. What kind of question is that? My mother would be alive and I'd be able to have a bank account!

And being forced to sleep in a tent in winter sucks. Waking up to your mom dead on your couch sucks. You're talking about waiting lists for non-emergency stuff, and ignoring the actual DEATH which happens. And it's a lot of deaths: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...alth-coverage/
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2019, 06:54 PM   #322
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 7,814
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
In that case would you tell the BernieBros who keep claiming "OMG Sanders was so popular he would have won in 2016" the same thing? Because as long as that claim is made, the problems with that claim need to be pointed out.
Then start by actually finding one. The drivel you've been spreading instead just doesn't cut it.

On one side, there is absolutely all of the available evidence. On the other, there is "but the evidence doesn't count" and "but the Republicans would be mean to him (which apparently means they wouldn't to another Democrat instead)". Guess which one gets tiresome faster.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2019, 09:25 PM   #323
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,010
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
On one side, there is absolutely all of the available evidence. On the other, there is "but the evidence doesn't count" and "but the Republicans would be mean to him (which apparently means they wouldn't to another Democrat instead)". Guess which one gets tiresome faster.
I mean it is possible that if Sanders was the Dem candidate increased attacks could have lowered his approval. It's also possible those attacks may have been ineffective or he performed well in the debates and gained even higher approval. But imagined results of non-existant polling doesn't constitute evidence. So I favor the polls that were actually conducted.

Last edited by The_Animus; 27th February 2019 at 09:27 PM.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2019, 11:19 PM   #324
Shadowdweller
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 743
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
How often does this need to be debunked?

The reason why Sanders was so popular is because he was never the subject of sustained attacks by the Republicans. Heck, republican politicians were more likely to praise him than attack him. And that would have changed had he won the nomination.
I don't believe that's actually accurate. Certainly Sanders has benefitted from a lack of targeting by the major conservative propaganda organizations. However, he's also been quietly pushing his viewpoints in town halls and progressive media for well over a decade. Notwithstanding that he also has a widely recognized policy platform, unlike many of the other candidates.

The electoral reality, I think, is that in a nation where meager percentages of total voters actually vote, it is equally important to motivate more of one's core constituency to show up to the polls as it is to be less "iffy" or objectionable to the centrist / undecided voters who are actually responsive to discussion.

Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
(Oh, and by the way, despite claims that "people love socialist policies", there is a poll showing 76% people do not like the word socialist and would not vote for one, and since Sanders has used that label to describe himself, you can be assured the republicans would take every opportunity to remind people of that.)
Politicians are occasionally capable defining themselves by more than a single word But we'll see.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2019, 11:48 PM   #325
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
I don't believe that's actually accurate.
Because?

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
Certainly Sanders has benefitted from a lack of targeting by the major conservative propaganda organizations.
Ya think?

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
However, he's also been quietly pushing his viewpoints in town halls and progressive media for well over a decade. Notwithstanding that he also has a widely recognized policy platform, unlike many of the other candidates.
No one (that I know of) denies there is a progressive movement that goes as far as Sanders believes in. The rest of us progressives (that I am familiar with) do not believe the country is ready for as radical a change as Sanders believes in.

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
The electoral reality, I think, is that in a nation where meager percentages of total voters actually vote, it is equally important to motivate more of one's core constituency to show up to the polls as it is to be less "iffy" or objectionable to the centrist / undecided voters who are actually responsive to discussion.
Go for it, motivate these people, I can get behind that.

Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
Politicians are occasionally capable defining themselves by more than a single word But we'll see.
Funny you say that while supporting a candidate that has a single theme platform.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 01:44 AM   #326
Shadowdweller
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 743
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Funny you say that while supporting a candidate that has a single theme platform.
1) Did I say that I was supporting or endorsing Sanders? No, actually I didn't.
2) "Single-payer Health Insurance"; "Green New Deal"; "Income Inequality" (presumably remedied by tax increases on the Wealthy); Foreign non-interventionism.

Come on, SG, you're more literate than that.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 07:07 AM   #327
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,688
I'm for universal, government health insurance. Does that punch my ticket into the "progressive" club?

I have the distinct sense that there are a lot of people who self define as progressive who care more about the label than preventing Donald Trump, an obvious real and present danger.

Despite my concerns that the dems are determined to screw up in 2020 by nominating someone who won't play in the rust belt, I will wholeheartedly support the nominee no matter who it is. To any self styled progressive who is unable to say the same thing, so far as I'm concerned they're a Trump supporter and an enemy of progressive values.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 28th February 2019 at 07:29 AM.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 07:20 AM   #328
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,688
wrong thread
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 12:10 PM   #329
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Funny you say that while supporting a candidate that has a single theme platform.
It's M4A, tuition free public college, a $15 minimum wage, marginal tax rate of about 70% on income over $10 million, and a GND with a federal jobs guarantee, and no more disastrous regime change ops.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 12:14 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 12:12 PM   #330
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Despite my concerns that the dems are determined to screw up in 2020 by nominating someone who won't play in the rust belt, I will wholeheartedly support the nominee no matter who it is. To any self styled progressive who is unable to say the same thing, so far as I'm concerned they're a Trump supporter and an enemy of progressive values.
Even if Jeb Bush decided to run as a Democrat?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 01:13 PM   #331
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,205
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Even if Jeb Bush decided to run as a Democrat?
Isn't he still better than Trump?
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 01:13 PM   #332
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That's... I can't fathom how you could possibly conclude this. Did you miss the smiley? Did you not get the reference? ...
"I was only joking" doesn't excuse blackface whether we are talking about stage make-up or ill-considered racist rhetorical snark. That said, if I was mistaken about the nature and intent of your commentary, I'd be willing to let the issue lay where it is.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 01:58 PM   #333
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Are you assuming that applecorped's unsupported claim is true at face value? Or did you independently fact-check?
Why would anyone take Applecorp's (or anyone else's) word on anything without at least a healthy modicum of independent research and exploration?

I started here and then skimmed through the references that article provided, as well as a few other sources. But this isn't a major issue for me, and it literally would be unsurprising to me as this type of skullduggery is increasingly part and parcel of most modern mainstream US Politics. I'm more interested in supporting and promoting an alternative to this type of BS, than I am chasing rats down dark alleys and wasting time on their circular firing squad distractions.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:06 PM   #334
Axiom_Blade
Master Poster
 
Axiom_Blade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,979
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
So people like "free college"... would they still like it if they knew their taxes would go up to support it (keeping in mind that Sanders proposed increasing taxes on the middle class as well as the wealthy)? They like "single payer health care"... will they be happy with they type of government control that would be required, and/or the waiting lists that might result? Would private insurance be completely outlawed?
Who knows? This is speculation. I'm interested in facts.

Quote:
But hey, maybe you think "People love a good thief, and Americans really do deserve to die".
If the GOP can just waggle their fingers and make the voters believe whatever they want, what's the point of even having a nomination? Whoever you nominate will lose anyway!

The anti-Bernie people credit the GOP with truly amazing mind control powers. Sanders is, according to the available evidence, the most-loved politician in the US (or very close). Somehow, though, the GOP will be able to convince people that he's an evil thief who wants to turn the US into Stalinist Russia and kill us all. If this is true, the Democrats should just pack it up now. It's over! We're going to get four more years of Trump, no matter who gets nominated.
Axiom_Blade is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:16 PM   #335
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
Who knows? This is speculation. I'm interested in facts.
This is how it would be paid for:

Quote:
Sanders has proposed something he calls a speculation tax, a small levy on every stock, bond or derivative sold in the United States.

The revenue would go toward free tuition at public colleges
and universities and would also be used to pare down student debt and pay for work-study programs, as well as other programs
http://cepr.net/documents/fst-facts-myths-12-10.pdf

Quote:
Is there any polling on the topic?
Quote:
In a May 2010 poll nearly 6-in-10 voters favored establishing a financial tax on Wall Street speculation that would tax frequent trading of stocks and assets, and then dedicating that money to Social Security in order to make it more solvent (59% favor, 36% strongly favor).
Quote:
October 2010 “talkback” testing of messages found that “the idea of a ‘speculation tax’ on trades proved memorable and relatively persuasive” across party lines. (Topos research report for the Ford Foundation).
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:16 PM   #336
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Quote:
But then, instead of having your property seized, would you truly be better off if you simply got stuck on a waiting list waiting for health care? It does happen... I have a cousin who injured his shoulder playing hockey and it took months to arrange an MRI (despite the fact that such things could be done in a week in the U.S. That's months of unnecessary pain.)
Yes, I'd be better off. What kind of question is that? My mother would be alive and I'd be able to have a bank account!
Ummmm... I'm not sure you understand what the concept of a waiting list is.

When you have a waiting list for health care services, you are not getting treatment. So, a person on a waiting list ends up in the same position as someone who simply can't afford treatment. And while people who have critical diseases do get faster service than those with minor ailments, people can still die as a result of waiting lists.

I've tried to explain the difference between a "Healthcare for all" plan and a "single payer" system to you but you seem to have ignored pretty much everything I wrote. But then, this is typical.... whenever I mention the problems in the Canadian "single payer" system I always seem to get accused of, I don't know, wanting to see all sick people rounded up and launched into the sun or something. My point is, and has always been: coverage for everyone (including poor people who can't afford it) is a good thing, but there is more than one way to accomplish that goal. The Canadian system of "government pays everything, nothing private" is probably the worst way to accomplish that goal.

While you and your mother may have been better off being in Canada than the United States when sick, you would have been even better off being in Britain, or Switzerland, or Finland... countries that are not single payer (by definition), but still manage to have universal coverage, at a cost roughly equivalent to Canada's, but with less problems with wait times.

Here's a study from the Commonwealth fund, a group that wants to improve health care coverage. America is ranked last. Canada isn't much better (9th of 11, but then that's an improvement over previous studies that show us 10th of 11, ahead of only the United States.)

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/cha...mance-rankings

If Bernie Sanders is proposing a true "single payer" system along the lines of what Canada, then he his short changing you. You can have a better system than Canada's.

Now, let me make a little prediction:

Despite the fact that I have repeatedly agreed that the U.S. system needs to be fixed, and that I've explained the problems with the Canadian system as well as compared it with superior systems offering universal coverage but without "single payer", you will once again go ballistic and accuse me of wanting Americans to get sick and die, all because you are stuck in this false dichotomy where the only choices are the American system and the Canadian system.


By the way... there's one other thing I should have brought up. You accused me (falsely I might add) of being callous over deaths or bankruptcies of people in the U.S. who can't afford health care. The thing is, the issue is not what I think health care should be... the issue is what the American electorate thinks health care should be. Even if I thought "Every American should have a personal doctor paid for by the government who follows them around and personally wipes their bottoms when they go to the bathroom", that opinion would be irrelevant if you can't convince the American voter that that plan is in their best interest.

And while yes, there are polls that show support for a "single payer" system, that support will vary according to the details of that plan. Given the fact the majority of people were against Obamacare (despite it was an improvement to what existed before) and that concerns over "death panels" were a thing, that the American public will automatically rush out and support a true "single payer" system.

By the way, here's a poll that shows that while Americans may want government involved in health care, the percentage that want "single payer" is only 31%. The majority of people either want a mixed private/public system, or they want everything privatized.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...esponsibility/
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:41 PM   #337
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Ummmm... I'm not sure you understand what the concept of a waiting list is.

When you have a waiting list for health care services, you are not getting treatment. So, a person on a waiting list ends up in the same position as someone who simply can't afford treatment. And while people who have critical diseases do get faster service than those with minor ailments, people can still die as a result of waiting lists.
I know exactly how waiting lists work. I've been on a waiting list for healthcare my entire adult life. My waiting list time frame is literally "forever".

Quote:
The Canadian system of "government pays everything, nothing private" is probably the worst way to accomplish that goal.
Personally, I like the NHS in the UK best. Or S Korea's. The Canadian system is just a million times better than the US's system.

Quote:
While you and your mother may have been better off being in Canada than the United States when sick, you would have been even better off being in Britain, or Switzerland, or Finland... countries that are not single payer (by definition), but still manage to have universal coverage, at a cost roughly equivalent to Canada's, but with less problems with wait times.
The UK is widely considered "single payer" even though some people choose to pay for private insurance, too. You're merely being pedantic by calling the NHS not single payer.

Quote:
Here's a study from the Commonwealth fund, a group that wants to improve health care coverage. America is ranked last. Canada isn't much better (9th of 11, but then that's an improvement over previous studies that show us 10th of 11, ahead of only the United States.)

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/cha...mance-rankings

If Bernie Sanders is proposing a true "single payer" system along the lines of what Canada, then he his short changing you. You can have a better system than Canada's.
Funnily enough, it's only been Kamala Harris the centrist who's advocated banning all private care/private insurance. Not Sanders.

Quote:
Now, let me make a little prediction:

Despite the fact that I have repeatedly agreed that the U.S. system needs to be fixed, and that I've explained the problems with the Canadian system as well as compared it with superior systems offering universal coverage but without "single payer", you will once again go ballistic and accuse me of wanting Americans to get sick and die, all because you are stuck in this false dichotomy where the only choices are the American system and the Canadian system.
I'm well aware of all the different types of UHC globally. The reason I prefer a universally available system paid for in taxes is because of the additional problems the US would have to converting to a system like France's. Independently I've come to the same conclusion these folks have: http://pnhp.org/about/



Quote:
And while yes, there are polls that show support for a "single payer" system, that support will vary according to the details of that plan. Given the fact the majority of people were against Obamacare (despite it was an improvement to what existed before) and that concerns over "death panels" were a thing, that the American public will automatically rush out and support a true "single payer" system.
It was specifically the individual mandate people really hated.
https://shadowproof.com/2010/09/23/w...t-health-care/
Quote:
Recall the beginning of the year. When FDL hired SurveyUSA to poll four swing districts and see what would happen if Democrats voted for the health care bill with the individual mandate. We chose SurveyUSA because of their record for accuracy, and we absolutely did not expect to find that incumbents like Vic Snyder and Steve Driehaus were 19 points down. People in those districts hated the health care bill. It was clear to anyone who had ever looked at a poll before that it was going to cause a serious train wreck for Democrats in the next election.
https://shadowproof.com/2010/08/31/t...to-talk-about/
Quote:
March 17: I wrote “There are currently 36 resolutions in states across the country to ban the mandate which forces people to buy private insurance, or face a penalty of up to 2% of their income that the IRS will collect — the very thing that Obama campaigned against. It will become a rallying cry for the right.


Quote:
By the way, here's a poll that shows that while Americans may want government involved in health care, the percentage that want "single payer" is only 31%. The majority of people either want a mixed private/public system, or they want everything privatized.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank...esponsibility/
Quote:
...but the share saying health care coverage is a government responsibility remains significantly higher than it was from 2008 through 2016 (51% said this in 2016, compared with 60% today).

Among those who see a government responsibility to provide health coverage for all, more say it should be provided through a single health insurance system run by the government rather than through a mix of private companies and government programs (31% vs. 25%).
None of the plans to transition to UHC are close to finalized yet. None of the bills being floated are considered final versions of "the plan" yet. The economists working on them consider them preliminary.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 03:06 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:43 PM   #338
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
This is how it would be paid for:
Quote:
Sanders has proposed something he calls a speculation tax, a small levy on every stock, bond or derivative sold in the United States.

The revenue would go toward free tuition at public colleges and universities and would also be used to pare down student debt and pay for work-study programs, as well as other programs
http://cepr.net/documents/fst-facts-myths-12-10.pdf
While I am not necessarily opposed to such a tax, there are a couple of problems:

- Many of the super-wealthy are not rich because of their buying and selling of stocks/bonds, but are rich because the assets they have have appreciated in value. Such a tax is not going to affect those people (yet I do think those people should be subject to a larger tax burden

- I would be concerned about whether this financial transaction tax would be enough to cover the costs. Not sure how much that that tax would take in, but a similar proposal estimated an income of $150 billion per year. The problem is, given the number of college students in the U.S. (16 million) and the average cost of tuition+other expenses (averaging >$13k per student), your total cost is going to be over $200 billion per year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financ...ransaction_tax

Now, even if Sander's transaction tax scheme would pay for college, there's still the issue of the other spending proposals that he has.

Oh, and by the way, in the 2016 election:

From: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...creases-220267
The top 0.1 percent would see their tax bills go up by more than $3 million, the report said, which would cut their after-tax incomes by almost half. But Sanders, going where few politicians dare, would also raise taxes on middle- and low-income families...

Now granted, that was the last election. But then, the U.S. now has billions more in debt that they have to contend with.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 02:59 PM   #339
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
While I am not necessarily opposed to such a tax, there are a couple of problems:

- Many of the super-wealthy are not rich because of their buying and selling of stocks/bonds, but are rich because the assets they have have appreciated in value. Such a tax is not going to affect those people (yet I do think those people should be subject to a larger tax burden
Decreasing inequality is not the point of the tax. It has two objective - fund programs (like tuition free public college) and stabilize the financial system.

Increasing taxes on the 1% is a whole different thing.

Quote:
- I would be concerned about whether this financial transaction tax would be enough to cover the costs. Not sure how much that that tax would take in, but a similar proposal estimated an income of $150 billion per year. The problem is, given the number of college students in the U.S. (16 million) and the average cost of tuition+other expenses (averaging >$13k per student), your total cost is going to be over $200 billion per year.
It's pretty sure it would work without a shortfall.
This is from Dean Baker, who is a very good economist, and considered merely "center left":

http://cepr.net/press-center/press-r...nsaction-taxes

Quote:
The revenue raised through an FTT would easily be large enough to cover the cost of many social programs, specifically free college tuition at public institutions.
Quote:
Now, even if Sander's transaction tax scheme would pay for college, there's still the issue of the other spending proposals that he has.

Oh, and by the way, in the 2016 election:

From: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...creases-220267
The top 0.1 percent would see their tax bills go up by more than $3 million, the report said, which would cut their after-tax incomes by almost half. But Sanders, going where few politicians dare, would also raise taxes on middle- and low-income families...
Raising the medicare payroll tax is one of the ideas which has been floated in one of the bills. Currently economists are trying to aim for something better. They're saying it's going to take a whole team of 6-10 economists devoting 6 months to doing nothing but health care policy to get there. But if we just emulate the UK, we can cover 100% of the population without even raising taxes.

Quote:
Now granted, that was the last election. But then, the U.S. now has billions more in debt that they have to contend with.
The people freaking out about the debt were completely discredited between 2007 and 2012. Krugman and Baker, et al don't seem to think it's going to be a serious impediment to pushing progressive policies through.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 03:09 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:05 PM   #340
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
The UK is widely considered "single payer" even though some people choose to pay for private insurance, too. You're merely being pedantic by calling the NHS not single payer.
No, I'm actually following the actual definition of "single payer".

By definition, "single payer" means that everything is funded by the government. No private insurance for "extra" care, no user fees. The U.K. allows people to buy private insurance. Canada does not. (Note: excluding a few areas like dental/eye care/drugs.) Therefore the U.K. is not a "single payer" system.

The problem is when you try to expand the definition to mean "government will cover people but you can still buy private insurance" then it is no longer "single payer".
Quote:
Funnily enough, it's only been Kamala Harris the centrist who's advocated banned all private care. Not Sanders.
If Sanders is proposing a mixed public/private system like the U.K., then he is not proposing a true "single payer" system. He is proposing a mixed-public/private universal health care system.
Quote:
It was specifically the individual mandate people really hated.
https://shadowproof.com/2010/09/23/w...t-health-care/
Let me get this straight... People hated the individual mandate (which was basically a tax/penalty for people who didn't have health insurance.) It was unpopular (why? either they don't like extra taxes, or they don't like government control of their lives.)

And now you are expecting people to agree with some sort of single payer health care (or private/public mixed system) that will also increase taxes on people?
Quote:
Quote:
By the way, here's a poll that shows that while Americans may want government involved in health care, the percentage that want "single payer" is only 31%. The majority of people either want a mixed private/public system, or they want everything privatized.
Quote:
...but the share saying health care coverage is a government responsibility remains significantly higher than it was from 2008 through 2016 (51% said this in 2016, compared with 60% today).
Among those who see a government responsibility to provide health coverage for all, more say it should be provided through a single health insurance system run by the government rather than through a mix of private companies and government programs (31% vs. 25%).
None of the plans to transition to UHC are close to finalized yet.
Which is exactly the point I've been trying to make.

Everyone keeps talking about how popular Bernie's plans and policies are, but as you said those plans are not finalized. Its easy to be in favor of something in principle, but be opposed to it once the details are fleshed out.

Heck, people can't even get the definition straight between what is a "single payer" vs. what is a "universal system".
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:16 PM   #341
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I'm for universal, government health insurance. Does that punch my ticket into the "progressive" club?

I have the distinct sense that there are a lot of people who self define as progressive who care more about the label than preventing Donald Trump, an obvious real and present danger.

Despite my concerns that the dems are determined to screw up in 2020 by nominating someone who won't play in the rust belt, I will wholeheartedly support the nominee no matter who it is. To any self styled progressive who is unable to say the same thing, so far as I'm concerned they're a Trump supporter and an enemy of progressive values.
As I've said before, liking, supporting, and even strongly advocating for a few progressive policies does not a Progressive make. Not that there is anything wrong with not being a Progressive. It is just (IMO), improper to claim to be Progressive, without acknowledging and at least, generally, leaning into Progressivism and Progressive economics.


As for standing behind the Dem. candidate, whoever they are, isn't that what the Republican party ended up doing in 2016? Is that really a well thought out and "best option" policy? There are several candidates on the Dem side that I would probably do a nose-hold vote for in 2020, but really only one (as of this moment) that I would actually support (donate to, advocate for, doorknock-march-makecallstostrangers for) and that is because he has changed his campaign's policy position in a crucial manner which removed the reason I ended up not being able to support him fully over in 2016.


Senator Sanders listed in the announcement of his 2020 Campaign his many reasons for running for the 2020 Dem. nomination to be president. Key among these was one point that I and others had strong reservations about in 2016 with regard to his policies. An issue that many of us pressed his campaign for a clear and unambiguous statement about:

Quote:
...I’m running for president because we need to make policy decisions based on science, not politics. We need a president who understands that climate change is real, is an existential threat to our country and the entire planet, and that we can generate massive job creation by transforming our energy system away from fossil fuels to energy efficiency and sustainable energy...
For those interested, while I have a strong interest in addressing climate change, my primary issue is this statement that "...we need to make policy decisions based on science, not politics."
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)

Last edited by Trakar; 28th February 2019 at 03:19 PM.
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:22 PM   #342
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
No, I'm actually following the actual definition of "single payer".

By definition, "single payer" means that everything is funded by the government. No private insurance for "extra" care, no user fees. The U.K. allows people to buy private insurance. Canada does not. (Note: excluding a few areas like dental/eye care/drugs.) Therefore the U.K. is not a "single payer" system.

The problem is when you try to expand the definition to mean "government will cover people but you can still buy private insurance" then it is no longer "single payer".
I understand that, and you're still just being pedantic. 99% of people consider the NHS in the UK an example of a "single payer system", even though *technically* it's a multipayer one.

Quote:
If Sanders is proposing a mixed public/private system like the U.K., then he is not proposing a true "single payer" system. He is proposing a mixed-public/private universal health care system.
Sure, in a pointlessly pedantic sense. Just go ask a Brit if they consider the NHS a "single payer" system.

Quote:
Let me get this straight... People hated the individual mandate (which was basically a tax/penalty for people who didn't have health insurance.) It was unpopular (why? either they don't like extra taxes, or they don't like government control of their lives.)
Nobody wants to be taxed to not get healthcare. Poor people hated it because it's a poor tax for being unable to have healthcare, and other people thought the US gov mandating purchase of a private product was just insane and corrupt. Then there's are the "taxation is theft, always" libertarians, but whatever.

Quote:
And now you are expecting people to agree with some sort of single payer health care (or private/public mixed system) that will also increase taxes on people?
"Free at the point of use" health care that everyone has access to that greatly reduces health care expenditures is something people like. It's why there are no grassroots efforts in Canada, the UK, and Oz to convert to the America system.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 03:23 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:27 PM   #343
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by Axiom_Blade View Post
Quote:
So people like "free college"... would they still like it if they knew their taxes would go up to support it (keeping in mind that Sanders proposed increasing taxes on the middle class as well as the wealthy)? They like "single payer health care"... will they be happy with they type of government control that would be required, and/or the waiting lists that might result? Would private insurance be completely outlawed?
Who knows? This is speculation. I'm interested in facts.
Ok, how's this for a fact?

From: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...dicare-for-all
Since Barack Obama ran for president promising to reform the healthcare system, public support for single-payer has climbed. Where 46% of the public supported such a system in 2008 and 2009, a recent Kaiser poll found 53% now support the idea....But in a sign of the major political and policy fights that lie ahead, the same Kaiser survey found that when respondents were told that a universal healthcare plan might give the government “too much control”, or that it might increase taxes, support dropped sharply. In those instances, the number of Americans opposed to the proposal rose from 43% to 62% and 60%, respectively.

So, a poll showing people love Bernie's health care plan... unless it increase taxes, or gives more control to the government (both of which it would.)

Quote:
If the GOP can just waggle their fingers and make the voters believe whatever they want, what's the point of even having a nomination? Whoever you nominate will lose anyway!
No, I don't think the GOP has some sort of magic mind-control ray that can automatically make people change their minds. But Sanders does have real skeletons in his closet, and there is a world of difference between someone who has never been attacked and one who is actually having to deal with various attacks.

Negative campaign ads do work. And there are a ton of them that could have been used against Sanders.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0604124913.htm

And if you don't agree, well, I'm glad you enjoyed having Dukakis as president. Oh, wait, you didn't. And why is that? He was ahead in the polls by double digits during the campaign! But he lost. And it is largely attributed to the "Willie Horton" attack ads.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:39 PM   #344
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Quote:
If Sanders is proposing a mixed public/private system like the U.K., then he is not proposing a true "single payer" system. He is proposing a mixed-public/private universal health care system.
Sure, in a pointlessly pedantic sense.
I got curious to see what exactly was in Sander's health care plan, so I wasn't relying only on memory.

You claim he's going to continue to allow private health care, but is that actually true?

From: http://fortune.com/2017/09/13/bernie...ayer-analysis/
The current system of employer-sponsored health insurance would essentially be eliminated

From: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...s-single-payer
Sanders’s single-payer proposal would create a universal Medicare program that covers all American residents in one government-run health plan. It would bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option.

Sounds to me like he's not going to allow private insurance, i.e. go to a Canadian "all government pays" system rather than a mixed system. (Maybe he's changed his mind or plans and I just haven't come across it.)
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 03:47 PM   #345
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
I got curious to see what exactly was in Sander's health care plan, so I wasn't relying only on memory.

You claim he's going to continue to allow private health care, but is that actually true?

From: http://fortune.com/2017/09/13/bernie...ayer-analysis/
The current system of employer-sponsored health insurance would essentially be eliminated

From: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...s-single-payer
Sanders’s single-payer proposal would create a universal Medicare program that covers all American residents in one government-run health plan. It would bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option.

Sounds to me like he's not going to allow private insurance, i.e. go to a Canadian "all government pays" system rather than a mixed system. (Maybe he's changed his mind or plans and I just haven't come across it.)
I think the key word is "essentially", and for "bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option".

In the UK, if you buy BCBS, you're still covered by the NHS, so they're not competing. Few people/companies opt to purchase private insurance when the national system is robust, though.

In the US, we also have lots of docs who are strictly pay out of pocket so they don't have to deal with any third party payers. Some function like little one-person insurance companies on their own, where you pay the doc a set free per month and have unlimited access to the doc. I don't think anyone's planning on banning that.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 03:49 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 04:03 PM   #346
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,729
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Quote:
I got curious to see what exactly was in Sander's health care plan, so I wasn't relying only on memory.

You claim he's going to continue to allow private health care, but is that actually true?

From: http://fortune.com/2017/09/13/bernie...ayer-analysis/
The current system of employer-sponsored health insurance would essentially be eliminated

From: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...s-single-payer
Sanders’s single-payer proposal would create a universal Medicare program that covers all American residents in one government-run health plan. It would bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option.
I think the key word is "essentially", and for "bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option".
So, where's your proof that private insurance will still be allowed in some form?

And yes, I do recognize that "essentially" and "compete" are vague words. But the devil is in the details.
Quote:
In the UK, if you buy BCBS, you're still covered by the NHS, so they're not competing.
In the U.K., you can buy private health care insurance that allows people faster access to treatments that they could still get under the public plan.

Is that "competition"? I think it is. Its the same service that's offered publically, just delivered quicker under the private system.

https://www.internations.org/go/movi...ance-in-the-uk

Quote:
In the US, we also have lots of docs who are strictly pay out of pocket so they don't have to deal with any third party payers. Some function like little one-person insurance companies on their own, where you pay the doc a set free per month and have unlimited access to the doc. I don't think anyone's planning on banning that.
You don't think? Shouldn't you find out before you decide to support Sanders' health care plan?
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 04:17 PM   #347
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
...Oh, and by the way, in the 2016 election:

From: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...creases-220267
The top 0.1 percent would see their tax bills go up by more than $3 million, the report said, which would cut their after-tax incomes by almost half. But Sanders, going where few politicians dare, would also raise taxes on middle- and low-income families...

Now granted, that was the last election. But then, the U.S. now has billions more in debt that they have to contend with.
This was based upon the old M4A proposal presuming that it was enacted and in place in 2017. This was primarily a 2.2% increase in all ordinary income in all but the lowest income bracket between incomes of $10,065 and $49,250 and a Progressive capital gains/dividends tax starting at 17.2%.
Not an incredibly onerous bill for cradle to grave health care for people who are generally without any current health care options beyond using ERs or state/county indigent health services where they are eligible for such.

Link to actual report mentioned in Politico: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publ...proposals/full

Of course the perspective of the Tax Policy Center has always been severely slanted towards the idea that taxes are bad and should generally always be reduced not increased. But I don't see how their analysis can or should be seen as a grossly negative appraisal, especially given their inherent "free-market neoliberal economics" bias:

Quote:
Conclusion:
Senator Sanders’s tax proposals would modestly raise tax rates for most taxpayers but would raise them significantly for high-income taxpayers.
Repealing the AMT and the limit on personal exemptions and itemized deductions would simplify the tax code. By taxing capital gains and dividends at the same rates as other income and by eliminating the opportunity to avoid the tax on capital gains through gifts and bequests of appreciated property, the plan would reduce the incentives and opportunities to engage in some forms of wasteful tax avoidance and would simplify the calculation of taxes on gains.

The proposal includes two substantial new excise taxes: a financial transaction tax and a carbon tax. The FTT would improve financial markets in some ways — by discouraging flash trading and speculation — but it would also reduce liquidity and raise the cost of capital for businesses.
A carbon tax, in contrast, would make markets work better by putting a price on carbon emissions, thereby forcing households and businesses to take account of the environmental costs of their activities.

The Sanders tax proposals would increase federal revenues by $15.3 trillion between 2016 and 2026, or about 6.4 percent of GDP. By themselves, the tax increases could reduce the national debt substantially and might also reduce interest rates, but Senator Sanders has been quite explicit that the revenues are earmarked to finance an expansive set of new spending priorities. Thus, the plan is unlikely to do much, if anything, to reverse the currently unsustainable path for public debt. Moreover, there is a risk that spending might outstrip the significant new revenues and exacerbate the nation’s long-term financial imbalance.

At the same time, the higher tax rates would significantly reduce incentives to work and save, especially for high-income households, and would raise the cost of capital for businesses]
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 04:17 PM   #348
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
So, where's your proof that private insurance will still be allowed in some form?

And yes, I do recognize that "essentially" and "compete" are vague words. But the devil is in the details.
Again, this is still in the "plan formulation" stage.

Quote:
In the U.K., you can buy private health care insurance that allows people faster access to treatments that they could still get under the public plan.
According to people in the UK (there are several here you can ask) having the private insurance doesn't give much more benefit, so they generally choose to not get it.

Quote:
Is that "competition"? I think it is. Its the same service that's offered publically, just delivered quicker under the private system.
It's not competition, because they're still covered under the NHS, too, even if they buy insurance.

Quote:
You don't think? Shouldn't you find out before you decide to support Sanders' health care plan?
No, I trust his (and Warren's) economic advisers completely (it's the same group they're getting their policies from). There is absolutely no chance what they end up coming up with will be worse than what we have now. And completely banning all private health care would be sort of pointless when the goal is simply to have a high quality, robust public system.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 28th February 2019 at 04:19 PM.
kellyb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 04:49 PM   #349
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,688
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Even if Jeb Bush decided to run as a Democrat?
I didn't think that the "...within the actual realm of possibilities" qualifier was needed, but I'll tack that on retroactively.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 04:58 PM   #350
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,211
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Even if Jeb Bush decided to run as a Democrat?
Trump was nominated to extend a middle finger to the GOP establishment, Bush included.

Trump was elected to extend a middle finger to the political establishment in general, and the DNC establishment in particular.

The sooner you internalize this truth, the sooner you will be on the path to defeating Trump's reelection.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2019, 05:08 PM   #351
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Trump was nominated to extend a middle finger to the GOP establishment, Bush included.

Trump was elected to extend a middle finger to the political establishment in general, and the DNC establishment in particular.

The sooner you internalize this truth, the sooner you will be on the path to defeating Trump's reelection.
The trouble has never really been about Trump, it is primarily about the lockstep GOP fealty to the Party above Nation and its current leadership regardless of who that leader is or what he proposes as long as they maintain control of the donation spigots that keep them in power. Trump, under a normal system of checks and balances would have still been corrupt, but the administration would have been largely stalemated by their own actions, incompetency, and inabilities to govern (as they largely have been even with the GOP rejection of their own constitutional responsibilities).
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2019, 03:55 PM   #352
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 23,827
Originally Posted by Trakar View Post
Why would anyone take Applecorp's (or anyone else's) word on anything without at least a healthy modicum of independent research and exploration?

I started here and then skimmed through the references that article provided, as well as a few other sources. But this isn't a major issue for me, and it literally would be unsurprising to me as this type of skullduggery is increasingly part and parcel of most modern mainstream US Politics. I'm more interested in supporting and promoting an alternative to this type of BS, than I am chasing rats down dark alleys and wasting time on their circular firing squad distractions.

Do you think it is okay that she, and the young lady that asked about his campaign's problems with sexual harassment, have been driven offline by wave after wave of attacks by Bernie supporters?


Is this going to happen to any citizen that dares to ask uncomfortable questions of Saint Bernie Hollowed-Be-His-Name?
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 12:39 PM   #353
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
Do you think it is okay that she, and the young lady that asked about his campaign's problems with sexual harassment, have been driven offline by wave after wave of attacks by Bernie supporters?

Is this going to happen to any citizen that dares to ask uncomfortable questions of Saint Bernie Hollowed-Be-His-Name?
I haven't seen any indication that there has been any coordinated or dedicated ambition to do this, and wouldn't approve or join any such effort to do such. I don't think anyone should be forbidden to speak their minds for, or against, anything, nor, however, do I think that anyone should be protected from criticism regarding what they have said or done.

The problem in this issue, was the disingenuous attempted "gotchas" that were anticipated when these leading political operator's identities were concealed trying to make it seem like the issues they were raising were framed the way they were by ordinary people, not establishment Democratic party operatives with an (as far as I can tell) personal agenda, which doesn't involve promoting progressive public policy.

Regardless, feel free to promote your screed, my primary goal in this thread is to promote and discuss the policies and reforms offered by the Sanders' campaign and when appropriate, to discuss what I would consider as improvements to the positions they announce. I'm not going to waste time distracting from those goals by extended arguments and attacks on positions or people that are at best, peripheral to my above stated goals.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 12:42 PM   #354
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Bernie's out there repeating his rallies today. CSPAN might as well have pulled old footage out.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 12:44 PM   #355
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Trump was nominated to extend a middle finger to the GOP establishment, Bush included.

Trump was elected to extend a middle finger to the political establishment in general, and the DNC establishment in particular.

The sooner you internalize this truth, the sooner you will be on the path to defeating Trump's reelection.
As intimated before, I am not focused on defeating Trump (I'm more than willing to let him continue to defeat himself), I am focused on promoting a winning set of Progressive public policies and Progressive elected officials to promote and advance those Progressive policies into legislative accomplishments.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 12:52 PM   #356
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Bernie's out there repeating his rallies today...
I expect to see those increasing and growing in popularity throughout the next decade. Public rallies are an integral part of an engaged democracy, and without an engaged and increasingly Democratic electorate, democracy quickly fades and blends into the types of oligarchical expansion we have seen over the last several decades where money, more than people, decide public policy.
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 01:46 PM   #357
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,052
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I'm for universal, government health insurance. Does that punch my ticket into the "progressive" club?

I have the distinct sense that there are a lot of people who self define as progressive who care more about the label than preventing Donald Trump, an obvious real and present danger.

Despite my concerns that the dems are determined to screw up in 2020 by nominating someone who won't play in the rust belt, I will wholeheartedly support the nominee no matter who it is. To any self styled progressive who is unable to say the same thing, so far as I'm concerned they're a Trump supporter and an enemy of progressive values.
I have lost any interest in those in the rust belt who support trumpf or any ******* like it. They are free to wither on their vines and stalks.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 02:30 PM   #358
The_Animus
Illuminator
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,010
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Bernie's out there repeating his rallies today. CSPAN might as well have pulled old footage out.
It's almost as if he is a man of integrity with a consistent message. What voter could possibly like that in a politician?
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 03:28 PM   #359
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
It's almost as if he is a man of integrity with a consistent message. What voter could possibly like that in a politician?
Too bad that wasn't a winning political strategy in the last US election.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 04:08 PM   #360
Trakar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trakar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 12,513
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
It's almost as if he is a man of integrity with a consistent message. What voter could possibly like that in a politician?
For those interested in either Senator Sanders and/or the message and character of him and his campaign here is a link to the streamed rally so that you can judge for yourselves and compare to the rallies and information that his opponents hold, if you like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Yg9MfgdbRg

Bernie, the Activist pretending to be a politician. Not me, Us!
__________________
Trakar
"By doubting we come to inquiry, and through inquiry we perceive truth." — Peter Abelard
"My civilization can do anything!" - David Brin (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i275AvgVvow)

Last edited by Trakar; 2nd March 2019 at 04:10 PM.
Trakar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.