South Carolina: The Debate that Ate the Party

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
What I wonder about, honestly, with nationalized health insurance is how do you get your problems resolved? Because right now I can only think of one government agency that deals with every American and that's the IRS. Have you ever tried to contact the IRS?
 

clairecloutier

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,178
Well, it’s not like trying to get your problems resolved with private insurance is all that easy, either. I’ve spent quite a few hours on the phone with our private insurance, trying to get things straight. MassHealth (Medicaid) does have longer phone wait times, though.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
Well, it’s not like trying to get your problems resolved with private insurance is all that easy, either.
Do you think that I think it is????

I don't even think Louis thinks things are okay under the current system.

Does that mean that therefore the best answer is Nationalized health insurance and no one needs to ask a single question about how it would play out or can we discuss the issues without just dismissing concerns as if any criticism of proposals means people don't see problems with the current system?
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
Sorry overreacting but really, my question did not presume things are fine or better under the current system.

Its just that I have tried to contact the IRS and never gotten through. Is there a reason why I should assume a government agency that large dealing with health care would be less cumbersome? I realize in this dishonest climate no one can believe that a question is actually honestly one someone has thought about not because they are opposed to Medicare for All, but because she just wondered. Yeah I'm angry. We threw away good candidates because they wouldn't promise the sky with no way to get there.

I admit I'm so angry at Bernie's magical thinking right now I can't be rational. Are we stupid? This stuff cannot be created by waving a magic wand. Its hard. Goddamn someone who won't address that in a presidential debate. Goddamn him and his magic thinking that will blow up the left and kill reform for a generation.
--------
this is about the best explanation of Bernie Sanders candidacy I've seen. Its why Sanders is really good and important if he's not actually going to win, if he is say, a Dennis Kucinich. He was never meant to be a nominee or president, its not even in his universe of why he is in politics:

David Von Drehle in the Washington Post

Sanders is a gestural candidate. Supporting him is a way of pointing in the general direction of a certain kind of change. He’s not interested in the details. ...Sanders voters are caught in a feedback loop. Their candidate speaks truth to power. When others disagree, it’s because power is threatened. If power is threatened, Sanders must be speaking truth. There’s no incentive to be serious or literal when your goal is not to persuade but to provoke.
And my real thoughts on M4A. There's no way there. Argue all you want, we'll be lucky to expand Obamacare in this utterly divided political climate that no one is even proposing a way out of.
 
Last edited:

topaz

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,629
Sorry overreacting but really, my question did not presume things are fine or better under the current system.

Its just that I have tried to contact the IRS and never gotten through. Is there a reason why I should assume a government agency that large dealing with health care would be less cumbersome? I realize in this dishonest climate no one can believe that a question is actually honestly one someone has thought about not because they are opposed to Medicare for All, but because she just wondered. Yeah I'm angry. We threw away good candidates because they wouldn't promise the sky with no way to get there.

I admit I'm so angry at Bernie's magical thinking right now I can't be rational. Are we stupid? This stuff cannot be created by waving a magic wand. Its hard. Goddamn someone who won't address that in a presidential debate. Goddamn him and his magic thinking that will blow up the left and kill reform for a generation.
--------
this is about the best explanation of Bernie Sanders candidacy I've seen. Its why Sanders is really good and important if he's not actually going to win, if he is say, a Dennis Kucinich. He was never meant to be a nominee or president, its not even in his universe of why he is in politics:

David Von Drehle in the Washington Post



And my real thoughts on M4A. There's no way there. Argue all you want, we'll be lucky to expand Obamacare in this utterly divided political climate that no one is even proposing a way out of.
So what is the alternative?

The current system sucks. Are you saying we all should expect a lower standard of living and be content to be exploited by a system that could give a shit whether we live or do, let alone prosper.

Social Security Admin's stats show about 62% of the population makes less than 40, 000 annually. Almost 70% of Americans make less than $50K a year. This is not sustainable. We have a recession coming, GUARANTEED within the next two years. So when 70 to 70% of the American public earns less than 40k(because unless major changes are made) this will be number within the 5 to 10 years. Then what?

My friend graduation last year with his BBA from University of Wi-Milwaukee. He's had to pay for his college education through financial aid and his earned wages for the last 8 years. When he graduated, he owed over $70k in financial aid. His student loan payment is around $700 a month. He is manager at franchised national restaurant; his partner is a teacher, he and his partner are homeowners with another friend(they own a duplex). In order earn more money, he, his partner and some friends(myself included) decided to open a franchise restaurant with our 401k funds. My friend in order to make more money, needed to open the franchise. He works 70 hours a week. He and his partner are barely making it. How long do you think my friend can work 70 hours a week at the age of 50 without it taking a toll on his health? My guess this is not sustainable for a long period of time.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
Currently there is no alternative. The system is breaking down. People who have the least resources and least power in society will suffer a lot as this happens.

I don't have an answer. No one does. So I guess magical thinking is a nice drug.

I'm inclined to believe that fingers in the dike, while not a way forward, are better for real people than simply telling fantasies. We're in a time of breakdown, as much as we can shore up Obamacare, Medicaid, and other programs, we will prevent more suffering than we will have if the system blows apart or the Oligarchs succeed, the most likely fallout from creating more division.

ETA: Did electing a democratic socialist in Chile in 1970 make things better in the long run?
 
Last edited:

PRlady

Nerdy flack
Messages
34,488
Currently there is no alternative. The system is breaking down. People who have the least resources and least power in society will suffer a lot as this happens.

I don't have an answer. No one does. So I guess magical thinking is a nice drug.

I'm inclined to believe that fingers in the dike, while not a way forward, are better for real people than simply telling fantasies. We're in a time of breakdown, as much as we can shore up Obamacare, Medicaid, and other programs, we will prevent more suffering than we will have if the system blows apart or the Oligarchs succeed, the most likely fallout from creating more division.

ETA: Did electing a democratic socialist in Chile in 1970 make things better in the long run?
Well since the US chose to help depose Allende, we'll never know, will we?
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
Well since the US chose to help depose Allende, we'll never know, will we?
Hey Bernie is that you? Everything would have gone well had not the US intervened of course!

Hooray we're all Berniebots now!! :cheer:

ETA: The point for those who haven't already adopted far left thinking, is that when you elect an extreme left candidate they are swept away by a huge reaction if they have not already reformed society incrementally to reduce the power of wealth. That's what happened in Chile and it did not requite the US intervention for Chile to be driven over the edge by rightwing reaction. And it was just a mere few decades before the country recovered.

That meant huge suffering because people wanted to jump far to the left and didn't calculate the reaction.
 
Last edited:

MacMadame

My G.O.A.T is better than your G.O.A.T.
Staff member
Messages
32,019
Does that mean that therefore the best answer is Nationalized health insurance and no one needs to ask a single question about how it would play out or can we discuss the issues without just dismissing concerns as if any criticism of proposals means people don't see problems with the current system?
I would love to debate this. But maybe not buried in a thread about one debate. :D

Here are some articles that are reactions to the debate:

First some fact-checking!

One saying Biden delivered and Sanders didn't from Jennifer Ruben:

Compares last night to the GOP candidates trying to take down Trump in 2016:

ETA to remove last link. It belongs in another thread.
 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
31,219
I have no idea what we’re even talking about now. It seems like scare tactics going wild.
 

clairecloutier

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,178
Returning to the health care theme for a minute, I want to share an article I recently read that is several months old, but still totally relevant:


The Army Built to Fight Medicare for All

I highly recommend the article, as it gives a lot of context to the whole health care debate. But, it's long, so I will summarize key points here.


-- In 2017, healthcare lobbyist executive and former GOP operative Chip Kahn became concerned when he realized Democratic politicians (aside from Bernie Sanders) were beginning to support Medicare for All

-- He created a coalition of health care lobbying groups under a new umbrella organization called the Partnership for America's Health Care Future

-- The Partnership's original mission was to fight Medicare for All. BUT, "The Partnership has since expanded its efforts to oppose all major expansions of government-financed health care."

The industry still views single payer as the doomsday scenario. But by early 2019, it'd become far from the only worrying possibility, as prominent Democrats floated all manner of routes to universal health care. The problem: each achieved their goal in roughly the same way — by having the federal government annex broad swaths of the private insurance market, either by creating a competing public option or expanding the existing Medicaid or Medicare programs deeper into the private sector's territory.
-- What's important here is that the health care industry is not interested in "negotiating" with the American public, so to speak, in any way, by considering any changes. They just want to keep our current structure in place so they can keep making the same money off us.

-- And they ARE making huge amounts of money. For example, the article states: "Insurance industry profits ballooned to $23.4 billion in 2018, up from $10 billion a year before Obamacare went into full effect in 2014."

-- So now they've started this Partnership, with the explicit goal of protecting those profits. The Partnership's whole budget is not public, but the article states they are willing to spend "many millions" to get their way.

-- They are putting out major ad pushes, both to consumers and legislators.

Outside the Beltway, the Partnership pitches itself as a nonpartisan educational resource on health care. Inside the Beltway, it provides a constant reminder of the power players Democrats are up against.

The message to both those audiences is simple: Health care reform will take away Americans' "choice" and "control" and empower government "bureaucrats" by forcing everyone into a "one-size-fits-all system."

The group bombards policymakers, journalists and voters with its talking points daily, leaning heavily on digital platforms to reach specific constituencies.

.... Many of those ads feature a local citizen — Matthew Majestic in Macomb County, Mich., Lisa Smith in White Stone, Va. — talking to the audience about government-run insurance systems that will force Americans to "pay more to wait longer for worse care."
-- So basically, they are deploying traditional Republican scare tactics to make people afraid of changing to a different health care system. "It could get worse," is the message they keep whispering into Americans' ears.

"We have threads that hold health care together," Kahn said. "If you just want to cut all those threads, I don't know what the outcome will be."

I think it's good to be clear on the fact that many of the people arguing against Medicare for All are trying to frame the national debate over healthcare for their own profit--not for our benefit. Yes, things could become chaotic and worse for a while in a transition to Medicare for All. But they could also eventually come better. That's the goal. And I see no reason to not at least try to work toward that goal, when the current system is so obviously failing the country.
 

Michalle

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,536
At some point awhile back I saw a comment from Sanders on this issue that I found compelling, which made the parallel that at one time we didn't have Social Security or Medicare at all, and that we were able to get those programs up and rolling within a few years (this is from memory, so I may not be getting what he said exactly). We have enacted huge new programs in the past that we now take for granted - this isn't even an entirely new program, just an expansion of an existing one. That's obviously not a complete answer to the objections, it just is something I found re-assuring as a mental model, that this is something that can be done if the will and the effort is there to do it, sort of a paradigm shift.
 

Buzz

Well-Known Member
Messages
33,043
Some undecided SC democrats were interviewed and most mentioned Biden. Good news for Biden I hope. Pete, Bloomberg and Warren were also mentioned.
 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
31,219
Studying history would help.
You need to take a chill pill and stop with the superiority act who is only interested in shutting other people down by attempting to sound smarter when you really don’t post anything to show that. Nobody is buying it. Seriously.
 

Vagabond

Well-Known Member
Messages
14,977
You need to take a chill pill and stop with the superiority act who is only interested in shutting other people down by attempting to sound smarter when you really don’t post anything to show that. Nobody is buying it. Seriously.
You are the one who said, "It seems like scare tactics going wild," when people old enough to remember were having what seemed to me to be a reasonable, informed discussion.

What do you say we take chlll pills together? 💊 💊 :saint:
 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
31,219
You are the one who said, "It seems like scare tactics going wild," when people old enough to remember were having what seemed to me to be a reasonable, informed discussion.

What do you say we take chlll pills together? 💊 💊 :saint:
I would love that actually. This primary season has gotten so ridiculous.
 

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
The discussion of whether trying to take bigger steps, revolution, or whatever you want to call it or whether it will be worse if you do is one that will always happen in a situation like this. @topaz can speak very persuasively to the case for more radical action and it helps me to listen, but I am just concerned because I tend the other way, so I am expressing my fears and apprehensions, not trying to scare anyone else.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,655
At some point awhile back I saw a comment from Sanders on this issue that I found compelling, which made the parallel that at one time we didn't have Social Security or Medicare at all, and that we were able to get those programs up and rolling within a few years (this is from memory, so I may not be getting what he said exactly). We have enacted huge new programs in the past that we now take for granted - this isn't even an entirely new program, just an expansion of an existing one. That's obviously not a complete answer to the objections, it just is something I found re-assuring as a mental model, that this is something that can be done if the will and the effort is there to do it, sort of a paradigm shift.
Most everything can be done. But it always helps to know how you're going to do it especially when you need support of people you need to convince first. "We'll get it done somehow" is usually not a good argument to make in that case and more often than not, that's when chaos ensues and the results are mediocre at best.
 

PRlady

Nerdy flack
Messages
34,488
You know, as long as we have a democracy most people vote in, I generally trust the government more than the corporations.

But HHS Secretary Azar just refused to promise that a ******** vaccine would be available to everyone, opposing price controls. (Trump is going to kill him with his bare hands.) the real problem is having a government in thrall to big corporations, the worst of both worlds.
 

rhapsody

Well-Known Member
Messages
944
Late comment but this was the worst debate of this cycle for sure. The moderators were shit and I literally can't name anyone who won this debate.

My boy Bernie didn't receive any mortal blows but it wasn't good... which is probably the best to hope for as the favorite. Didn't do himself any favors but didn't get hurt either.

My original favorite Liz from last summer tried too hard to replicate her absolutely amazing performance from last week (probably the best performance I've ever seen) and failed.

Amy who I was rooting for in terms of the moderate candidate was awful; her petty fights with Pete were cringeworthy. On both of their sides. And I wonder if people btching about how Sanders always yells over people are going to btch about how Pete literally yelled and whined OVER Sanders for 30 seconds as they both spoke for a question that wasn't directed at him with absolutely no warning to shut up from the moderators. His platitudes are awful and I can't wait to not see him as the year moves forward.

Biden did well... for him. He was on his way to landing a good hit on Bloomberg until he started mixing the moderator/monitor words and just stumbling in general. It was painful to watch. He will probably win SC and if that knocks out Pete (and Amy) I'd be happy having him continuing until whenever as the moderate alternative.

Steyer is actually a really, really sweet guy (met him a couple of times in SF) but he has no business running. Also makes no sense that he wouldn't qualify for the last debate but did qualify for the debate closer to the Super Tuesday vote. I understand that he didn't get the % needed from a necessary poll but it's stupid.

Bloomberg is a sht debater who would get malled over by Mango Mussolini and anyone who thinks otherwise is getting paid by him. Electable candidate my ass.
 
Last edited:

BlueRidge

AYS's snark-sponge
Messages
55,580
You know, as long as we have a democracy most people vote in, I generally trust the government more than the corporations.

But HHS Secretary Azar just refused to promise that a ******** vaccine would be available to everyone, opposing price controls. (Trump is going to kill him with his bare hands.) the real problem is having a government in thrall to big corporations, the worst of both worlds.
Corporatism!

or budding fascism when it is married to the authoritarian populist tendencies of Trump :yikes:
 

Domshabfan

Lady Hale's Brooch
Messages
9,485

Interviews with dozens of Democratic Party officials, including 93 superdelegates, found overwhelming opposition to handing Mr. Sanders the nomination if he fell short of a majority of delegates.
This makes me think they did cheat him in 2016 as well.
 

VGThuy

Well-Known Member
Messages
31,219



This makes me think they did cheat him in 2016 as well.
You’re not the only one who thinks it was rigged, one of the Dem candidates now said so back in 2017:

 

Peaches LaTour

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,232
He has a portrait in the attic


Yeah but most people don't think of it that way. Witness @Louis's comments on this issue.


I never watch them. I don't think they are a good way to pick a Presidential candidate.


Because he does sympathize with them. Not because they are authoritarians but because they are left-wing. Like a lot of lefty "revolutionaries," he romanticizes them. This is different from Trump who truly admires authoritarians and wishes he had their power. But it's still troubling IMO.
And my portrait is on display next to Pete's, just in case anybody is interested. ♡
 

Artistic Skaters

Drawing Figures
Messages
7,266
I'm a CBS news watcher, but even so I rank this as the worst debate so far. I really disliked the reality TV aspect with the chaos of everyone arguing at the same time and wished they would have just cut their mics until order was restored.
 

Japanfan

Well-Known Member
Messages
22,624
When you're asking Big Government to pay for Big Healthcare, I think it's reasonable for Big Brother to ban things like cigarettes or soda (and/or punish people who use these products). This is a logical extension of the Big Government initiatives Sanders, Warren, and others are pushing.

I don't want to pay for "Medicare for All." I REALLY don't want to pay for "Medicare for All" for smokers and people who intentionally harm their health.
'Intentionally harm their health' could also apply to athletes or people who engage in dangerous sports like mountain climbing. Getting injuries that require medical treatment is usually part of being an athlete/extreme athlete.

And if you want to punish people who drink sodas, that is probably about half the population to hazard a guess.

People who smoke are severely punished by taxes, at least in Canada. And probably punished again when they are in hospital due to a smoking-related condition, where judgemental caregivers might be less than kind to them.

Then you have obese people and people with inadequate diets. People who can't be bothered to exercise.

You just can't punish people with less than ideal lifestyles by denying them healthcare.

Universal healthcare is healthcare for all. Period.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top
Do Not Sell My Personal Information