Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 18:33:56

Yes 95% of Trump voters will come out to vote again but for whom will they vote? His diehard do anything he wants base is just some 20 to 25% of the electorate and that is not enough to win it. And on the other side all the Hillary voters will also come out again and they are "mad as hell and arn't going to take it any more". They will vote for anybody against Trump no matter how crackpot their platform. Now throw in that 25% that voted for Trump just because he was not Hillary and have been very disappointed by how Trump has failed to rise to the job and we are looking at a solid Dem victory if Trump is the candidate. The sooner the GOP comes to grips with this reality the better their chances for the White house and Congress are in 2020.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9825
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby mmasters » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 19:29:01

vtsnowedin wrote:Yes 95% of Trump voters will come out to vote again but for whom will they vote?

They will vote for Trump. Only the media would have you believe otherwise.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 19:37:29

vtsnowedin wrote:They will vote for anybody against Trump no matter how crackpot their platform....


Don't be so sure of that. I think the Ds are quite capable of coming up with proposals so wacky that people will absolutely hate them and they'll lose even to Trump.

Take Kamala Harris---she just proposed taking away everyone's health care who has private health insurance. Since a large majority of Americans have private health insurance---and they mostly like it----any proposal by Harris and the Ds to destroy people's existing private health insurance coverage is going to meet stiff resistance.

Image
Kamala Harris (D) wants to take away people's private healthcare insurance coverage----I don't think so....

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22793
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 20:19:53

I'm not a Kamala Harris fan but lets flesh out her proposal a bit. :twisted:
If you get rid of the insurance industry you also get rid of all those insurance premiums you and your employer have been paying. Of course the government will have to raise taxes by at least the same amount so that might be a wash to your pocketbook. :lol: Then you have 150,000 insurance company employees out of work and very qualified to fill jobs in the new government health agency. Bet the top execs all get a nice office. Of course a lot of them spent a lot of time trying to deny benefits and get somebody else to pay your bill. No need of that so maybe we could cut 50,000 or so but we would have to retrain them or sign them up for welfare.
Next come the hospitals. No mention of taking them over by eminent domain but with the US government being the only paying customer they will pretty much have to follow big brothers lead or go out of business. Then come the doctors and nurses. I read somewhere half are already looking for the exits. waiting times might increase. And finally we have the drug companies. Should be able to get prices down to something more reasonable with just one customer especially as the government will have every single research dollar in existence. Expect the pace of new discoveries and development to grind to almost a complete halt. This will be especially true once the government bureaucracy figures out it is cheaper to feed you placebos and let you die quickly then to let you drag on wasting tax dollars. Not to worry though about any money you had left you wanted to spend foolishly. The government will readjust the death tax to make sure it all goes to a good cause.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9825
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 20:40:20

I’m in favor of a single payer plan. But there’s more devils in the details than we have discussed.

Medical insurance constitutes a significant portion of some folks compensation package. Were you to eliminate private insurance it would disrupt the employment market place. Companies would new ways to recruit and hold employees. The tax code would require some rework and simplification. This would include the public sector and military. They would have to pay more to hold their folks.

Also it would allow folks much more mobility in the work place, they could quit a job or take a sabbatical cal without worrying about health insurance. It would fundamentally change how Americans view work. It would take some of the bite out of being a wage slave.

I’m not arguing against or for the proposal. Just thinking of the ramifications. They are much bigger than are currently being discussed.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13248
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 20:43:21

If you like your insurance plan you can can't keep your plan.
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12789
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 20:49:30

Newfie wrote:I’m in favor of a single payer plan. But there’s more devils in the details than we have discussed.

Medical insurance constitutes a significant portion of some folks compensation package. Were you to eliminate private insurance it would disrupt the employment market place. Companies would new ways to recruit and hold employees. The tax code would require some rework and simplification. This would include the public sector and military. They would have to pay more to hold their folks.

Also it would allow folks much more mobility in the work place, they could quit a job or take a sabbatical cal without worrying about health insurance. It would fundamentally change how Americans view work. It would take some of the bite out of being a wage slave.

I’m not arguing against or for the proposal. Just thinking of the ramifications. They. Are much bigger than are currently being discussed.

Excellent points and yes they are talking in simplistic terms with half baked ideas.
I worked for thirty years to get fully paid health care for the Missis and I through our retirements. That has already become only part paid and it would not surprise me to see a single payer program come in that would end what I have and leave me with the healthcare and taxes of of someone that never made a morning early in their life.
I'm not totally opposed to a single payer plan as it could be more efficient but I certainly don't want to get ripped off during the transition.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9825
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Newfie » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 20:52:21

Yup, I had not thought of that. Personally I nerved considered a payed health plan as a retirement benefit, simply because I found them to be hollow promises. Maybe you get it, maybe you don’t.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 13248
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 21:02:36

Newfie wrote:Yup, I had not thought of that. Personally I nerved considered a payed health plan as a retirement benefit, simply because I found them to be hollow promises. Maybe you get it, maybe you don’t.

Not that I had much say or choice in the matter. The SEIU union gave up raise after raise to keep full healthcare to the point that in thirty years they never won a raise that was more then the rate of inflation. Having a wife and three children having a steady ,if mediocre, paycheck plus the health care made going into the private sector a gamble no prudent husband could take. We muddled through with a lot (make that tremendous amounts ) of work on the wife's part and got them all through college.
It chaps my cheeks that they changed the deal almost the day I retired and there is always the constant worry that a nursing home will end up with all my assets.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9825
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby mmasters » Tue 29 Jan 2019, 21:56:25

I think US citizens that aren't retired should have a catastrophic health care plan. Call it Medicare light. If something happens to a vital organ and is considered potentially life threatening the US Gov will cover 80% of the cost to get it fixed. Everyone should have to pay $50-100 bucks a month to have this coverage. IF something happens to you that doesn't involve a vital organ or isn't determined to be life threatening then the patient must cover 100% of the cost if they don't have other insurance.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 01:11:36

Cog wrote:If you like your insurance plan you can can't keep your plan.

But don't worry, they'll tax you more to make up the difference. :roll:
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 01:16:55

mmasters wrote:I think US citizens that aren't retired should have a catastrophic health care plan. Call it Medicare light. If something happens to a vital organ and is considered potentially life threatening the US Gov will cover 80% of the cost to get it fixed. Everyone should have to pay $50-100 bucks a month to have this coverage. IF something happens to you that doesn't involve a vital organ or isn't determined to be life threatening then the patient must cover 100% of the cost if they don't have other insurance.

But the way the system works, $100 bucks won't BEGIN to cover the cost. So who pays for all those uncovered medical expenses. And when you have a $500,000 liver transplant, or a $300,000 brain tumor therapy, six figure heart attack, etc. the large balance would be a big problem for most people, so what then? (If you doubt that, the politicians were going nuts over the $8000ish "large" deductibles for families under Obamacare).

It's great to toss around ideas about a plan, but if you aren't at all realistic about what it would cost, it's no better than Bernie Sanders nonsensical claims re his medical plan and costs.

It's a great idea IN THEORY, if 90% of people were financially responsible instead of the other way around, but the monthly premium for the catastrophic coverage would be more like a few hundred bucks. (Costs get ugly for those over 50, and really ugly at about 60, on average. Older people get sick a lot more.)
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby lpetrich » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 10:15:55

Plantagenet wrote:Since a large majority of Americans have private health insurance---and they mostly like it----any proposal by Harris and the Ds to destroy people's existing private health insurance coverage is going to meet stiff resistance.

Mostly like it? Who loves its bureaucracy? Its being tied to employment? Its having to change plans with a new job? Its denial of coverage of pre-existing conditions? Does anyone ever say "Hooray! I won't get covered! They discovered a pre-existing condition"?

I note that many of those on Medicare seem to love it, despite its being a single-payer system. "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!"

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "In my on-boarding to Congress, I get to pick my insurance plan. As a waitress, I had to pay more than TWICE what I’d pay as a member of Congress. It’s frustrating that Congressmembers would deny other people affordability that they themselves enjoy. Time for #MedicareForAll."

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Also, pretty sure one Dante’s Circles of Hell includes scrolling through a mirror-hall of agonizingly similar healthcare plans like “UHG Choice Master HMO 1800” vs “RedGo Option Plus EPO 2000.” I don’t know one normal person in this country that actually enjoys open enrollment."

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "People don’t want overly complicated choice between pricey, low-quality plans. We want an affordable solution that covers our needs, like the rest of the modern world. Medicare for All: - Single-payer system - Covers physical, mental, & dental care - 0 due *at point of service*"
User avatar
lpetrich
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu 22 Jun 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 10:53:21

social health care has it's good and bad attributes. In Canada the health care plan is available to everyone, in certain provinces, there are no charges. The good thing is everyone gets the benefit of standard health care, those who need operations eventually get them etc. There are a number of bad things however:
1. too many people and too few surgeons. The wait times for certain operations are horrendous and those that can afford it are often traveling to the US or elsewhere to pay for the procedures so they get done in a timely manner
2. the stress on the system isn't helped when every mom who has a kid with a sniffle decides they should take them to the nearest emergency. The current triage at emerg in most provinces doesn't allow for weeding the really needy from the not so needy out of emerg wait times. There have been numerous stories of people waiting in an emergency room for 12 hours to see a doctor when they were in minor heart failure.
3. waste in the system. Because it is a simple procedure for Doctors and their staff to just bill the province (the administrator of the health care program) when they need something there is little impetus to streamline operations and cut costs. Need some gauze....why not just order the expensive stuff? Putting more money into the health care system doesn't alleviate this problem but tends to compound it.
4. not enough service sector support. The wait times on a simple MRI in some provinces are now out to 4 months unless deemed an emergency. Certain specialty x-rays also have long wait times. This pretty much negates the idea that technology will improve early identification of problems. In some provinces, individuals have an option to pay for an MRI but this is frowned upon by Doctors in the system who claim the private MRI's are subject to too much user error.
5. Closed shop attitude. In a couple of provinces, there has been made an attempt to start up semi-private health care. The idea being that those who can afford the additional private support will pay for it and take some of the stress off the public health care system. The various gov'ts have been fighting against this tooth and nail as they claim it somehow lessens the health care the poor get and rewards the rich (makes no sense to me but I'm not a socialist either). A hybrid model makes the most sense as far as I can tell but it is a political no no to many.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7230
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 11:50:32

Image
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby mmasters » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 12:15:58

Outcast_Searcher wrote:
mmasters wrote:I think US citizens that aren't retired should have a catastrophic health care plan. Call it Medicare light. If something happens to a vital organ and is considered potentially life threatening the US Gov will cover 80% of the cost to get it fixed. Everyone should have to pay $50-100 bucks a month to have this coverage. IF something happens to you that doesn't involve a vital organ or isn't determined to be life threatening then the patient must cover 100% of the cost if they don't have other insurance.

But the way the system works, $100 bucks won't BEGIN to cover the cost. So who pays for all those uncovered medical expenses. And when you have a $500,000 liver transplant, or a $300,000 brain tumor therapy, six figure heart attack, etc. the large balance would be a big problem for most people, so what then? (If you doubt that, the politicians were going nuts over the $8000ish "large" deductibles for families under Obamacare).

It's great to toss around ideas about a plan, but if you aren't at all realistic about what it would cost, it's no better than Bernie Sanders nonsensical claims re his medical plan and costs.

It's a great idea IN THEORY, if 90% of people were financially responsible instead of the other way around, but the monthly premium for the catastrophic coverage would be more like a few hundred bucks. (Costs get ugly for those over 50, and really ugly at about 60, on average. Older people get sick a lot more.)

Yeah, you're right the older people would have to pay more but I think $50-100 a month is doable for catastrophic coverage for someone in their 20s 30s and maybe even 40s. The other thing I forgot to mention is the costs in the US healthcare system are ridiculous compared to other countries. Trump seems aware of this, I hope he can address it before his time is up.
User avatar
mmasters
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun 16 Apr 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Mid-Atlantic

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 12:26:38

The Ds seem utterly oblivious to the fact that Medicare is going broke NOW. The Medicare trust fund will vanish in just 7 years

NYT: medicare-social-security-finances.

Forcing 100 million people off their private healthcare plans and onto Medicare will just make Medicare go broke that much faster, unless Medicare taxes are raised drastically. The Ds plan will make Medicare go bust in 3 years instead of 7.

And I don't hear the Ds promising to raise everyone's taxes dramatically. I just hear the Ds making another crazy promise to give away free stuff. But nothing is free----everything has to be paid for somehow.

Most likely the Ds want to just continue what we are doing now.....borrow more money and drive the deficit higher and higher.

Cheers!
hall of shame
People who buy new cars and then cry crocodile tears over climate change. The manufacture of a typical new car emits ca. 16 tons of CO2 and a new EV is actually much worse since the battery also has to be manufactured, resulting in a total carbon footprint of ca. 30 tons of CO2
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22793
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 13:01:05

vtsnowedin wrote: I worked for thirty years to get fully paid health care for the Missis and I through our retirements. That has already become only part paid and it would not surprise me to see a single payer program come in that would end what I have and leave me with the healthcare and taxes of of someone that never made a morning early in their life.

I'm not totally opposed to a single payer plan as it could be more efficient but I certainly don't want to get ripped off during the transition.

EXCELLENT point.

I was going to make a similar comment, as someone who is 60. I can just imagine the transition happening sometime around the time I turn 65 and am eligible for the Medicare that I paid into for my entire working life (from age 16 on, once I got onto official payrolls).

When taxes are raised massively to pay for that, instead of getting the Medicare with the Medicare taxes I paid, I'd then be paying, in addition, for a number of folks', or even families' care, due to the new taxes.

(And just to be clear, at age 65, I'd no longer use private insurance, so the democrat meme of the higher taxes substituting for high health premiums DOES NOT APPLY for those who have earned Medicare from their life of working -- UNLESS they get a big tax credit to compensate, and I don't see that happening. After all, "free" medical care requires MASSIVE amounts of tax revenue.)

There are 42+ million, or nearly 13% of the US population from age 55 to 64, who could well get such a shaft, by the way.

https://www.indexmundi.com/united_state ... ofile.html

In the far left vision of running around "fixing" things, the ideas of fairness or rationality re the producers, never have enough importance, IMO. If you take away enough of the incentive to produce, you'll have far less production, whether the far left believes it or not.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Cog » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 13:35:24

Wait, let me get this straight. You moderates are only NOW getting worried about what the radical Democrats have planned for the country?
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12789
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: THE Democrat Thread Pt. 2

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Wed 30 Jan 2019, 13:43:22

Cog wrote:Wait, let me get this straight. You moderates are only NOW getting worried about what the radical Democrats have planned for the country?

No, why would you think that? Lack of your paying attention over time isn't my problem.

In the mean time, true moderates are ALSO concerned about what the far right has planned like endless unproductive military spending (not only social programs are expensive), like trying to deny women the right to choose an abortion, like trying to dictate people's sexual activity, marriage status, among CONSENTING ADULTS, like trying to mix religion with government, despite the constitutional concept of the separation of church and state, etc.

I know it is hard to accept, but people can be all over the map about a LOT of issues, without being hard core leftists. And people willing to think for themselves might decide not to throw in with EITHER major party, and deem themselves moderates.

I've been called both a liberal and a conservative on this site a number of times, for expressing my opinion about one issue. It all depends on the observer's perspective.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 7251
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests