Jpizzle

Not the new Donald Trump Presidency thread

66,845 posts in this topic

10 minutes ago, Gritzblitz 2.0 said:

Penn State refusing to double Chase Young is easily one of the top 5 willfully stupid things I have seen this year in sports.

And I regularly watch a baseball team managed by Brian Snitker.

And they're paying for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supreme Court has 2 cases pending with Trump's tax returns. One with the House request to add to their impeachment process. The second is with the NYSD attorneys office involving their quest in the hush money payments. Both expected to be resolved by the high court very soon.:munch:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GEORGIAfan said:

Now you are the one twisting yourself into a pretzel. My point had nothing to do with the plan I advocate for and I never considered my position.  FDR was talking about changes to the status quo. SS was the status quo at the time of the quote. I was pointing out from the status quo perspective Bernie's plan fits FDR's description. 

Saying the New Deal was status quo by 1936 is a stretch. If anything it was a major rebuke of the existing status quo of the era and required more time to firmly supplant those existing structures. Things were moving in that direction but it was still very vulnerable to being reversed and to see the status quo reestablished. It'd be like saying Obamacare was the healthcare sector status quo by 2012 even though we both know that was when it was at its most vulnerable and could have been a flash in the pan if the election went differently. Things were moving in that direction, which is why the GOP had to say they'd repeal and replace instead of simply repealing, but it hadn't stuck yet.

That out of the way, that was not the point of the quote. It was about opponents of the New Deal conceding that they had to use that kind of language, since things were shifting in that direction, but that they were selling the snake oil of the status quo. So, that is why the quote is applicable to the M4Am and other M4A knockoffs... They know things have shifted enough that they have to do something but in order to protect the industry they have to sell it in this kind of package.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
 
3
 
 
 
 
 
3
5 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

Saying the New Deal was status quo by 1936 is a stretch. If anything it was a major rebuke of the existing status quo of the era and required more time to firmly supplant those existing structures. Things were moving in that direction but it was still very vulnerable to being reversed and to see the status quo reestablished. It'd be like saying Obamacare was the healthcare sector status quo by 2012 even though we both know that was when it was at its most vulnerable and could have been a flash in the pan if the election went differently. Things were moving in that direction, which is why the GOP had to say they'd repeal and replace instead of simply repealing, but it hadn't stuck yet.

That out of the way, that was not the point of the quote. It was about opponents of the New Deal conceding that they had to use that kind of language, since things were shifting in that direction, but that they were selling the snake oil of the status quo. So, that is why the quote is applicable to the M4Am and other M4A knockoffs... They know things have shifted enough that they have to do something but in order to protect the industry they have to sell it in this kind of package.

Social Security was law. M4All isn't law. M4All isn't even settled. Warren, Bernie, and the House have their own versions and they all differ, but they are all M4All/SP plans. 

2nd, M4All isn't the most efficient system. Building a more efficient and less costly system in terms of taxes isn't selling snake oil. Anyone who believes that is just exposing their own ignorance. 

Advocating for universal and affordable healthcare isn't exclusive to M4All or new. ACA proponents advocated and ran on the exact same things. At the end of the day. Running on fixing our ****** healthcare system is going to continue to be a thing until Government rate-setting happens.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GEORGIAfan said:

Social Security was law. M4All isn't law. M4All isn't even settled. Warren, Bernie, and the House have their own versions and they all differ, but they are all M4All/SP plans. 

2nd, M4All isn't the most efficient system. Building a more efficient and less costly system in terms of taxes isn't selling snake oil. Anyone who believes that is just exposing their own ignorance. 

Advocating for universal and affordable healthcare isn't exclusive to M4All or new. ACA proponents advocated and ran on the exact same things. At the end of the day. Running on fixing our ****** healthcare system is going to continue to be a thing until Government rate-setting happens.  

Yet the powers that be know the electorate has shifted in a particular direction and have to use the language of that shift in order to sell what they've always been selling. FDR talked on it in 1936 with how opponents of the New Deal tried to co-opt it and say they could actually do it better. You're seeing it again with how Dems and their donors are framing their healthcare plans. It isn't about saving Obamacare (sans Biden), it's about their own Medicare for [insert whatever here] plan which are always set up in a way to protect the health insurance industry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
1
13 minutes ago, Psychic Gibbon said:

Yet the powers that be know the electorate has shifted in a particular direction and have to use the language of that shift in order to sell what they've always been selling. FDR talked on it in 1936 with how opponents of the New Deal tried to co-opt it and say they could actually do it better. You're seeing it again with how Dems and their donors are framing their healthcare plans. It isn't about saving Obamacare (sans Biden), it's about their own Medicare for [insert whatever here] plan which are always set up in a way to protect the health insurance industry.

Not really. It is about adjusting to what voters want. Voters want to be able to choose to join the new system instead of being forced. Some want the ability to have special access. Warren, Kamala, and M4America would severely reduce/ the size of the insurance industry or eliminate it entirely. 

The M4All alternatives are just appealing to those wishes. And Medicare 4 All used to look more like Medicare 4 America or Kamalacare before it was a single payer plan.

Just look at the 2005 Kennedy version.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/2229

 At the end of the day. Bernie M4All language was stolen by him and now you are upset others are doing the same. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, GEORGIAfan said:

Not really. It is about adjusting to what voters want. Voters want to be able to choose to join the new system instead of being forced. Some want the ability to have special access. Warren, Kamala, and M4America would severely reduce/ the size of the insurance industry or eliminate it entirely. 

The M4All alternatives are just appealing to those wishes. And Medicare 4 All used to look more like Medicare 4 America or Kamalacare before it was a single payer plan.

Just look at the 2005 Kennedy version.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/2229

 At the end of the day. Bernie M4All language was stolen by him and now you are upset others are doing the same. 

M4A as a term dates back to the 70s and wasn't even the name of the bill it was describing. Also doesn't change that it was only really popularized over the past four or so years due to Sanders and his plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Psychic Gibbon said:

M4A as a term dates back to the 70s and wasn't even the name of the bill it was describing. Also doesn't change that it was only really popularized over the past four or so years due to Sanders and his plan.

Yea and the 70s version looked more like M4America than Single Payer.

Quote

Still, someone else did see hope in Medicare. One of these failed plans came from Republican Sen. Jacob Javits, who proposed expanding Medicare to cover the entire country’s population. Javits still used the language of “national health insurance,” but he became one of the first people publicly associated with the phrase “Medicare-for-all” when the New York Times used it to describe his plan, declaring on April 15, 1970: “Medicare For All Is Asked By Javits.”

 

Quote

Details of the Javits bill

The National Health Insurance and Health Services Improvement Act would, in its fist year, extend Medicare to widows over 60, widowers over 62, and all those with long-term disabilities [this last provision was eventually enacted in 1972]. The eligibility age of Medicare would then be lowered until all U.S. citizens and documented permanent residents would be covered by the end of year two.

Cost sharing for the program would be the same as Medicare at the time the bill was introduced, with the exception that the Medicare Part B premium would be eliminated. This means the bill included limited coverage of prescription drugs, and limits on days of stay for inpatient and long-term care. The Medicaid program would be preserved, and payments to providers as well as administration of the program would be the same as Medicare.

Similar to Sen. Kennedy's Health Security Act, the bill would be financed by a 3.5% payroll tax on employers, employees, and the self-employed (with only the first $15,000 of wage income being taxed for employees), along with a 50% contribution from general revenues.

Individuals could opt-out of payroll taxes by purchasing their own private health insurance of equal or better coverage, and employers could also opt-out of payroll taxes by offering insurance to their workers of equal or better coverage and paying at least 75% of the premium.

 

Bernie Sanders never sold voters on the specifics. He sold people on universal healthcare and that healthcare should be a right. That is why M4All support still plummets when voters are informed that they cannot keep their plans and private insurance will be eliminated or that taxes will go up. Sell people on grand ideas and that is what will be popular.

At the end of the day, you are mad because Warren/Kamala/etc have come in copied your brand and made a more popular plan with voters.  If SP voters didn't copy the Medicare brand or sold voters on specifics, this wouldn't actually be an issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Jake Fromm's regression as a passer is the most underreported UGA storyline of the season. He's objectively bad and has been so for much of the season. 

An elite defense is carrying UGA. That won't last.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GEORGIAfan said:

Yea and the 70s version looked more like M4America than Single Payer.

 

 

Bernie Sanders never sold voters on the specifics. He sold people on universal healthcare and that healthcare should be a right. That is why M4All support still plummets when voters are informed that they cannot keep their plans and private insurance will be eliminated or that taxes will go up. Sell people on grand ideas and that is what will be popular.

At the end of the day, you are mad because Warren/Kamala/etc have come in copied your brand and made a more popular plan with voters.  If SP voters didn't copy the Medicare brand or sold voters on specifics, this wouldn't actually be an issue. 

Wasn't your point.

He said it would cover all medical needs, including dental, mental, and eyecare, and that it'd do away with premiums and co-pays. Those are specifics.

You keep posting that stuff from that guy yet he never seems to have his finger on the pulse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now