Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2018 19:13:54 GMT
If the Republican’s agenda is so good why do they have to gerrymander districts to favor their electoral probabilities, why do they use Jim Crow tactics to suppress the minority vote, why do they lie about their positions (on healthcare, for example), or lie about the Democrats positions (like on immigration)? But don’t offer false equivalences like “the Democrats use similar political tactics”, they do not. Well, there's a presupposition to this that I don't accept, but I'm sorry, the ACA was a blatant grabbag giveaway to both the insurance companies and each and every one of the industries that prosper off of people's physical illness. How is it that anything the Democrats had to say about it was in the least bit honest? Btw - sorry, didn't mean to imply you're a Rebub, if I did earlier.. and I'm not a Dem btw, but I do agree more with their positions on, well, almost everything.. as opposed to their counterparts ACA certainly could have been created better, at it's inception, if the minority party (at the time) hadn't fought so hard to prevent it from happening, and simply worked as an honest broker to create good healthcare legislation. But now it seems their only goal is to "gut it", but without offering any better alternatives.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 4, 2018 19:37:29 GMT
It's the press that coined this neo-Victorian term, "sexual misconduct", which I'll refer to here because it's convenient. From what you're writing here, I'd say it's a fair inference that then the only way we should believe someone guilty of sexual misconduct is if they admit to it? Sorry, missed this bit. Your inference actually isn't fair...it involves a leap. What Trump demonstrated with the bus tape is an entirely different thing than an allegation of sexual misconduct. Straight from the horses mouth is different than an accusation/allegation. There's no need to even weigh the 'evidence' when someone is outright telling you, even boasting and laughing about, their own misconduct.
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Nov 4, 2018 19:37:57 GMT
Btw - sorry, didn't mean to imply you're a Rebub, if I did earlier.. and I'm not a Dem btw, but I do agree more with their positions on, well, almost everything.. as opposed to their counterparts ACA certainly could have been created better, at it's inception, if the minority party (at the time) hadn't fought so hard to prevent it from happening, and simply worked as an honest broker to create good healthcare legislation. But now it seems their only goal is to "gut it", but without offering any better alternatives. lobbyists can suck my thermometer......
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:11:33 GMT
Well, there's a presupposition to this that I don't accept, but I'm sorry, the ACA was a blatant grabbag giveaway to both the insurance companies and each and every one of the industries that prosper off of people's physical illness. How is it that anything the Democrats had to say about it was in the least bit honest? There's a lot I could say about this too, but I don't currently.. Do you think "the ends justify the means"? And also, like many Repubs, it looks like you want to focus on your one main issue, and ignore all of the other crap. I'm a life-long registered Democrat who voted for Bernie in the '16 presidential primary. You claimed the Democrats don't use the same tactics of Republicans of lying about the positions of their opponents, so I gave you an example of an issue where the Democrats did exactly that.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:16:05 GMT
Is this really true? What if farm and other wages were allowed to rise to market prices?
Here's the thing about the dreamers: it's a horrible Kafkaesque situation that only a monster would wish on even their own enemy, but let's say we legalize them all in one go the way Reagan did, what happens 20 years from now? What's the solution to that problem?
I speak with local farmers all the time here. Nobody wants the jobs they are offering. What happens 20 years from now? Well, in my experience, to answer that question we have to look at what is going on now... so let's take a peek... The Truth About Trump’s Economy I keep hearing that although Trump may be a scoundrel or worse, he’s done a great job for the economy. Baloney. Yes, the stock market is great, but 84 percent of it is owned by the richest 10 percent of Americans. The economy is growing, but very little of that growth is trickling down to average Americans. Jobs may be back but they pay squat, especially compared to the rising costs of housing, healthcare, and education. Trump slashed taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and he promised everyone else a wage boost of $4,000 but it never happened. Meanwhile, employers continue to cut pension and healthcare benefits. Jobs are less secure than ever. One in 5 jobs is now held by a worker under contract, without any unemployment insurance, sick leave, or retirement savings. Housing costs are skyrocketing, with a large portion of Americans now paying a third of their paychecks in rent or mortgages. Trump’s budget proposes drastic cuts in low-income housing. Trump’s undermining of the Affordable Care Act is also making life harder. Over the past two years, some 4 million people have lost healthcare coverage, according to the Commonwealth Fund. The costs of college education continue to soar. All Trump has done is make it easier for for-profit colleges to defraud students. And as the climate changes, more Americans are being hit with floods, mudslides, droughts, and wildfires. And what’s Trump’s response? Allow more carbon pollution into the atmosphere and make climate change even worse. So don’t be fooled. Don’t judge this economy by the stock market or economic growth, or even the level of unemployment. Look at actual living standards of average working Americans, and you see an economy that’s getting worse, not better. -Robert Reich So, yes, they (the caravaners) are taking a big risk by making this effort. But it's better than what they're experiencing right now. NADA. What if the farmers offered 20/hr full w2? How about 30? I'm sorry, but I don't see you addressing the question I asked, which was very specifically about the issue of this problem of the fate of the children of undocumented human beings who bring those children here to live once those children age into their own majority.
Put aside all the moral judgements from either side of the fence. Can't we all agree the dilemma of the dreamers is a problem? How to solve it?
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:24:16 GMT
It's the press that coined this neo-Victorian term, "sexual misconduct", which I'll refer to here because it's convenient. From what you're writing here, I'd say it's a fair inference that then the only way we should believe someone guilty of sexual misconduct is if they admit to it? This is precisely the kind of nasty ad-hominem that most political discussion eventually devolves into. No, I haven't even remotely suggested that this is the way I feel about Trump, or about any other issue, for that matter. Sorry you took it that way. This just sounded to me as though you were saying you did not so much care about his character displays but rather, the results: "But since then, I've been judging him on his results as the Chief Executive," I know a few folks here in Canada, who have said they don't give a flying Fuck whether or not Trump thinks it's okay to grab women's crotches, or whether or not Trump has honesty issues, or whether or not he contradicts himself, makes fun of alleged attempted rape victims or handicapped folks, so long as the policies he enacts, are in line with what they approve of. So, that "is not" then, what you were saying? (& Sorry if I took your words wrong.) Thank you for taking the time and making the effort to apologize. I wasn't offended, but I did want to shed some light on the dynamic and didn't want to proceed with any further argument from an ad-hominem premise. What I meant to convey is that I don't disagree with the criticisms of Trump's character, but that I ultimately judge the lack of character of almost all of the political leaders of my lifetime by the resulting social dysfunction of the society I live in, regardless of what facade they've projected. It's also true that Trump has taken some actions that I approve of.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:42:12 GMT
Well, there's a presupposition to this that I don't accept, but I'm sorry, the ACA was a blatant grabbag giveaway to both the insurance companies and each and every one of the industries that prosper off of people's physical illness. How is it that anything the Democrats had to say about it was in the least bit honest? Btw - sorry, didn't mean to imply you're a Rebub, if I did earlier.. and I'm not a Dem btw, but I do agree more with their positions on, well, almost everything.. as opposed to their counterparts ACA certainly could have been created better, at it's inception, if the minority party (at the time) hadn't fought so hard to prevent it from happening, and simply worked as an honest broker to create good healthcare legislation. But now it seems their only goal is to "gut it", but without offering any better alternatives. One thing that what the right-wing pundits are calling "Trump derangement syndrome" has made me regret is not speaking in response to some of the more shrill, and often racist red-wing-nut nonsense about Obama during his terms. The way I see it, both parties have devolved into little more than the shiny watch a hypnotist holds to keep people distracted. Regardless of which "side" is in, giant institutional interests and the super-rich will use the power of the sovereign as a way to keep what they have at the expense of everyone else. Yes, it would take a genuine political will with the public interest in mind to effect real healthcare reform. If I were King I'd immediately require any and all providers of medical-related goods and services to maintain strict transparency on a set of non-negotiable prices, strictly limit the role of insurance companies to catastrophic coverage and outlaw the pre-existing condition; and finally, reform the medical educational establishment to increase the number of new doctors and nurses and impose regulations on hospitals to reform the working conditions for interns. I'd also overtly nationalize the 3rd party payer systems for the elderly and the poor, but raise the age to 70 right away and devote significant resources to a merciless crackdown about fraud and try to retroactively claw-back the profits of the opiod producers. It wouldn't be perfect, but the primary logical fallacy of most arguments for one reform or another is that there can ever be any sort of static solution that won't eventually be broken by the future.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:51:08 GMT
It's the press that coined this neo-Victorian term, "sexual misconduct", which I'll refer to here because it's convenient. From what you're writing here, I'd say it's a fair inference that then the only way we should believe someone guilty of sexual misconduct is if they admit to it? Sorry, missed this bit. Your inference actually isn't fair...it involves a leap. What Trump demonstrated with the bus tape is an entirely different thing than an allegation of sexual misconduct. Straight from the horses mouth is different than an accusation/allegation. There's no need to even weigh the 'evidence' when someone is outright telling you, even boasting and laughing about, their own misconduct. Yes, I don't deny your point, but notice that now you've morphed to the idea of evidence from opinion and hearsay. The evidence as to the way Bill treated some women is voluminous, and some of the most damning of that evidence is corroborated by more than one source.
|
|
muttley
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 4,394
|
Post by muttley on Nov 5, 2018 7:58:24 GMT
Btw - sorry, didn't mean to imply you're a Rebub, if I did earlier.. and I'm not a Dem btw, but I do agree more with their positions on, well, almost everything.. as opposed to their counterparts ACA certainly could have been created better, at it's inception, if the minority party (at the time) hadn't fought so hard to prevent it from happening, and simply worked as an honest broker to create good healthcare legislation. But now it seems their only goal is to "gut it", but without offering any better alternatives. lobbyists can suck my thermometer......Is it mercury free??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2018 14:53:26 GMT
There's a lot I could say about this too, but I don't currently.. Do you think "the ends justify the means"? And also, like many Repubs, it looks like you want to focus on your one main issue, and ignore all of the other crap. I'm a life-long registered Democrat who voted for Bernie in the '16 presidential primary. You claimed the Democrats don't use the same tactics of Republicans of lying about the positions of their opponents, so I gave you an example of an issue where the Democrats did exactly that. You know the saying about politics and religion, yeah? I recently had two such experiences (one of which was a two-fer! ). A long time customer was in the other day for one of his monthly visits, and we've always had pleasant chats over the years, but not once have I ever broached either of those problematic subjects. This time however I asked him if planned on voting, and he said "hell yeah, I wish I could vote several times!", and I said "yeah, me too!". We talked a little while longer, but I couldn't tell which direction he was leaning so I said "well I'll be voting Democrat straight down the line". The look on his face said all that needed saying. He then offered a few Hannity inspired opinions about immigration, and I offered a few alternative facts on the subject, and well, he must have remembered something else he had to do, cuz he had to go. The other story involved my octogenarian aunt, who also must watch Hannity style entertainment, plus she's also an evangelical. Hmmm, more talk of immigration out of her. (wonder why that subject on so many minds? ) But she did offer "well, 80% of Christians back Trump so they should tell you something". I countered with, "actually I think it's 80% of evangelical Christians, which says something in itself." We bickered a while longer, but then she had to go herself, but on the way out the door she caught herself, and remembered the most important thing, "I love you" she said, which I countered with "I love you too".
|
|