REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

What ever happened to Impeach the President & Repeal Obamacare?

POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Friday, April 5, 2019 17:51
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 11142
PAGE 3 of 3

Saturday, November 14, 2015 11:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

I am so sorry to burst your idealistic bubble, but while in office Obama will not make enemies that would prevent him from eventually becoming as wealthy as Clinton.

Thank you for making my point.

Liberals and Democrats want to see Obama as a well-meaning man who made mistakes, or who was overcome by the weight of "the ways things are".

In your opinion, he strove for the Presidency in order to make a ton o' bucks afterwards. I personally think he was driven by overweening narcissism. But neither of us thinks he's a well-meaning person with the good of the nation in mind.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 14, 2015 2:50 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

In your opinion, he strove for the Presidency in order to make a ton o' bucks afterwards. I personally think he was driven by overweening narcissism. But neither of us thinks he's a well-meaning person with the good of the nation in mind.

I'd be uglier. Obama is a Republican, but not heartless like Clarence Thomas or Ben Carson.

Obama can do what he pleases for himself because the Democratic voters are befuddled. A good many Obama voters could easily drift over into the Republican Party.

Those Democrats-in-name-only believe their taxes are far too high. If only poor people would work, they wouldn't need welfare. They think the USA's military is keeping them safe from terrorists. You know, all things that a Republican would believe. The idiotic Iraq War and the prison at Guantánamo had a majority of Democratic voters' support. Most Democrats have no complaint about the NSA eavesdropping and the CIA assassinating because it keeps Democrats feeling safe. Exactly what a Republican feels!

All this mental confusion by Democratic voters leaves Obama free to cut deals that please the wealthy and powerful. Obama knows most of his voters agree with Republicans, so what is the big deal with governing as if he was a Republican? If Obama had been a white without the African name, he could have fit into the Republican Party. For an example of how that works there is an article about the Clintons and the Defense of Marriage Act. The Clinton's are white, but couldn't get into the Republican hierarchy in Arkansas, so Democrats they became. I find it easy to imagine them switching sides:

"But on a bigger level, DOMA is a reminder of the politics of "triangulation" that characterized much of the Clinton years. While Hillary Clinton has heavily invested in an image of herself as a gritty "fighter" for progressive causes, the realities of the mid-1990s were rather different. While Obama-era Republicans have generally pursued a politics of hostage taking and high-stakes confrontation, Clinton-era congressional Republicans were often much more willing to cut deals. The Clinton administration was also very willing to cut deals, signing things like DOMA, the 1996 welfare reform bill, and a 1997 budget agreement that cut capital gains taxes. This spirit of dealmaking largely evaporated when Republicans decided to impeach Clinton. For example, it's widely believed that the impeachment crisis scuttled a nascent Clinton-Gingrich agreement to partially privatize Social Security. www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/05/29/the-pact-between-bill-clinton-
and-newt-gingrich


The DOMA episode is a reminder of many liberal leaders' secret fears about the prospect of a new Clinton administration. Namely that far from being fighters, the Clintons are actually inveterate compromisers who might be excessively willing to go along with GOP legislative initiatives if Republicans could bother to set aside their Benghazi inquiries for a few months and come up with some initiatives. The new Clinton line on DOMA casts them as savvy strategists who helped outwit the right, but the historical record seems to show transactional politicians who made a cynical calculus that they had a lot to lose and nothing to gain from opposing DOMA."
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/10/30/9642602/clinton-doma-consti
tutional-amendment




The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 14, 2015 6:26 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There are more urgent events, but I have a question of my own - one that I've asked already: If Obama knew that change was impossible, why did he promise so much?


And, my other point: It's not that Obama "failed" to do anything substantive, he also actively campaigned for very regressive measures. Sins of omission AND sins of commission. You might explain away sins of omission, but not the other.



Honestly, I don't think Obama knew there was no hope to change anything when he was running.

I could go into one of my 10 paragraph things about that, but I think that pretty much sums it up.


Imagine the old WB Bugs Bunny cartoons when somebody's head turned into a sucker with "SUCKER" printed on the wrapper.

That was Obama. That was every one of us, whether or not we voted for Obama.

I bet the 5 or so families in America that were uber-rich before Obama got into office are now Mega-Uber-Ultimate Rich now.




I accuse those rich families of "Blackface"....

Using Obama, America's First Black President, the way they did to keep getting richer.

Fuckers....

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, November 14, 2015 8:51 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Honestly, I don't think Obama knew there was no hope to change anything when he was running.

Imagine the old WB Bugs Bunny cartoons when somebody's head turned into a sucker with "SUCKER" printed on the wrapper.

That was Obama. That was every one of us, whether or not we voted for Obama.

I bet the 5 or so families in America that were uber-rich before Obama got into office are now Mega-Uber-Ultimate Rich now.

I accuse those rich families of "Blackface"....

Using Obama, America's First Black President, the way they did to keep getting richer.

Fuckers....

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Watch Obama give his perspective on why the economy has become so good for corporations even as it’s become so bad for their workers.

He displays no urge to correct the situation. Obama has no plans, no policy, no nothing. Nothing he said would make any wealthy person uncomfortable about their future. He is perfectly inoffensive, which is what's completely wrong with him.



http://skylerflyer.deviantart.com/art/Ukiyo-e-Style-Serenity-Wallpaper
-548263551



www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?p0=263&iso=20170120T00&m
sg=Time%20left%20until%20Obama%20leaves%20office%22

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 6:56 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


I once believed in the American Dream and thought if I worked hard enough.........

Did you ever think that Bush or Reagan, hell any president had our benefit in mind when they campaigned for office? From what you have told me (that you voted for Obama) it's obvious to me that you have been disillusioned. Join the club. Like I said above, I truly fell for the whole "American Dream" bill of goods.......work hard and you too can become whatever you want, even president.

You state that Obama knew that change was impossible, and why did he promise so much. Well, if that's the case then hang him up by his balls. Him and all the others who knew better - Bush, Reagan, Clinton, Carter, Ford - fuck, while we're
at it all 44. Because if one knew, then they all did. Sold us a bill of goods.

Regressive measures!? Well, again......each president has done things that rob the poor to give to the rich. Believe me, if I knew what transpires in the minds of men
I wouldn't be here with you lot. I would be sipping champagne on a yacht with the other Illuminati. How's that for an answer? Fuck 'em all!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There are more urgent events, but I have a question of my own - one that I've asked already: If Obama knew that change was impossible, why did he promise so much?


And, my other point: It's not that Obama "failed" to do anything substantive, he also actively campaigned for very regressive measures. Sins of omission AND sins of commission. You might explain away sins of omission, but not the other.


--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 7:09 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Of course, all this is because of One Man......Obama. Ever since he stepped into office he has plotted and conspired with those rich corporations to their benefit and our detriment.

Oh, wait......I almost forgot, he's the only One responsible.

There, that should fix it. The only man who has promoted capitalism. Congress,
and the laws they pass (whenever they're in session) have nothing to do with it. The greedy bastards who sell "us" out, nothing to do with it.

There will come a time when they will pay for their avarice.
All of them, I may not be around to see it happen, but happen it will.
Let's put it this way, lots of these corporate fuckers will be jumping out of windows from their ivory towers.

Until then, Have A Nice Day!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Honestly, I don't think Obama knew there was no hope to change anything when he was running.

Imagine the old WB Bugs Bunny cartoons when somebody's head turned into a sucker with "SUCKER" printed on the wrapper.

That was Obama. That was every one of us, whether or not we voted for Obama.

I bet the 5 or so families in America that were uber-rich before Obama got into office are now Mega-Uber-Ultimate Rich now.

I accuse those rich families of "Blackface"....

Using Obama, America's First Black President, the way they did to keep getting richer.

Fuckers....

Do Right, Be Right. :)

Watch Obama give his perspective on why the economy has become so good for corporations even as it’s become so bad for their workers.

He displays no urge to correct the situation. Obama has no plans, no policy, no nothing. Nothing he said would make any wealthy person uncomfortable about their future. He is perfectly inoffensive, which is what's completely wrong with him.



http://skylerflyer.deviantart.com/art/Ukiyo-e-Style-Serenity-Wallpaper
-548263551



www.timeanddate.com/countdown/generic?p0=263&iso=20170120T00&m
sg=Time%20left%20until%20Obama%20leaves%20office%22


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 8:01 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Another way to answer the question of the day:




SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 9:56 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


SGG
Doesn't play. Can you please type out a disabled version of the URL (add a space in between http: and // or something, we can paste it into our browsers and correct it.)

Quote:

Of course, all this is because of One Man......Obama. Ever since he stepped into office he has plotted and conspired with those rich corporations to their benefit and our detriment.
Whoever said it was ONE MAN? Haven't I said, over and over, that the responsibility for this clusterfuck has been shared throughout the past 70 years or so by Democrats AND Republicans? But just because responsibility is shared doesn't mean that Obama gets to escape from his portion of it, does it?

When I listened to Obama , it was one long passive-voiced excuse ("The bubblegum got all over the dog") with no mention of how past Presidents - Democrat and Republican alike - encouraged the very processes that withered the middle class.... The skewing of the tax structure (Reagan, Clinton, Bush), NAFTA/CAFTA (Clinton), China in the WTO (Bush II), etc etc.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 10:44 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Of course, all this is because of One Man......Obama.

There will come a time when they will pay for their avarice.
All of them, I may not be around to see it happen, but happen it will.
Let's put it this way, lots of these corporate fuckers will be jumping out of windows from their ivory towers.

Until then, Have A Nice Day!


SGG

A President could push "these corporate fuckers" out a window. Today. I'm certain it is not gonna happen soon enough, knowing how past Presidents acted.

There will be new President, another one that does not want to violently solve Big Problems because their days will be absorbed by little gestures, posturing, jokes or sympathy. Big Problems frighten them. Presidents voluntarily handle only small problems: a terror attack in Europe, a funeral for Jimmy Carter, a tornado in Kansas, Israelis killing Palestinians, filibusters, a drone-strike on a hospital in the Middle East, oil price fluctuations, Putin in Ukraine, an interview on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, whatever is flashy that day. All small problems that the President can only make gestures and have postures. But there are some Big Problems I'm not bothering myself to name that the next President could solve instead of running away from, if she cared to be bothered by the solutions. I can give you a historical example.

Civil and Voting Rights. Slavery. There were many Presidents before Lincoln that had nothing of substance to say about slavery. They talked, but that was about it until the South violently forced the problem upon the President's agenda. Lincoln would have preferred to spend his time dedicating monuments and making speeches in hopes that South would voluntarily restrain itself from violently spreading slavery to the new territories. Instead, Lincoln had to kill US citizens by the hundreds of thousands. Certainly wasn't on Lincoln's agenda when he was elected. It should have been.

Many Presidents before LBJ had nothing much to say about civil and voting rights. They talked but rioting forced the problem upon the President's attention. LBJ wasted his work days hoping that, with enough bombs, Robert McNamara would somehow or other solve JFK's Vietnam War. LBJ really didn't want to look like a chicken and simply abandon S.E. Asia. Instead, LBJ killed US citizens by the thousands. Certainly wasn't on LBJ's agenda when he was elected Vice-President. It should have been.

If LBJ had known how soon he'd be dead, anyway, or that staying in Vietnam would elect Nixon, he should have done the right thing. Too much to ask of LBJ, the old fool lacked imagination.

Now the USA has a younger fool. Obama is exactly like other Presidents, hoping the next President solves the Big Problems while Obama wastes his work days on whichever daily mini-crisis is absorbing all attention in the White House. It was too much to expect Obama to place Big Problems on his agenda before the problems become a crisis.

http://planetspectra.deviantart.com/art/Fruity-Oaty-Bar-shop-sign-2-26
6335653


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, November 15, 2015 3:55 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


6-ix

My guess as to how things went is this: Obama promised so much because he really wanted to be president - not to do anything in particular, but to feel, finally. vindicated as being good enough, and to finally be accepted by people who matter. It wasn't political, it was personal.

I pretty much wrote off his initial response to the banking crisis as being any kind of meaningful marker of his aims. He didn't just step into a pile of shit, he sank in a septic tank with that. The crisis was rapidly unfolding, there were people in place who seemed to know what was going on, and there was a response already in progress. I don't think anyone could possibly be smart enough to grasp the complexities of the situation as quickly as required. (Though I personally did wonder at the time - if you want to make banks whole, why not just give money to mortgage holders to cover their loans? If you're going to give money away anyway, you might as well help people AND save the banks at the same time.) Overall, I thought that a better response was pretty impossible.

Instead, his direction became clear to me when he forbade the public option. It took a news article at that time to remind me how it all went, but it was like this: There was a VERY STRONG mandate for the 'single-payer' system, similar to Canada's. But that demographic was reassured that - though there was never going to be a single payer because, yanno, USA! USA! USA! - there for sure was going to be the public option. FOR SURE. So, don't worry single-payer folks, you've been heard. And it took ONE PRIVATE MEETING with insurance executives - and Obama, personally, in a speech, eliminated even the public option. Hence, our Frankenstein system was created.

It doesn't matter if he was threatened, or bribed, or both. Because more than ANYthing else, he just wanted to be one of 'them'. And, threat, bribe or both, they let him know that the public option stood in the way.

All that was quickly followed by (in no particular order) refusing to close Gitmo, expanding mass surveillance and building the surveillance data center in Utah, and expanding the drone program to include US citizens. He ordered his administration to cover up the extent of the BP/ Macondo/ Deepwater Horizon oil spill (I suppose if you use enough aliases after the fact you an obscure the guilty party) and used damaging methods to deal with it. The neocons got to run the State Department and set US policy for Israel, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and of course Ukraine. And he's shilling for TIPP etc,

I swear he loves him his drone strikes because it's the only thing they let him do on his own as president (unless of course he's willing to risk alienating 'them', which he isn't). Go get 'em, tiger! You show 'em what a powerful guy the president is! Take that!






SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 2:34 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Yes, all presidents lie, cheat and steal; then line their pockets - especially vice presidents. But most of your focus has been on Obama and what he has DONE to the people of this country. You have broadly stated
that both sides are guilty of wrong-doing; but it is my contention that
Obama did indeed start out with the idealistic notion that he could
make a difference, and the promises.

That's why I always say that I hope a republican wins this time out, because they have no idea what they're in for. That's why you hear pundits
say that Trump's Wall promise is a pipe dream; even Fox pundits smirk whenever they talk about such outlandish promises. It is not rocket
science. You guys are right, there are certain things in place that a
president must not mess with - Israel, Saudi Arabia, Oil companies, Big Banks, etc. Look at Congress, do you think they really give a shit about the voters - only when their jobs are on the line. Their cushy work 100
days a year jobs. Believe me, I know how it works, it's all rigged.

The bottom line is to keep the status quo, grease the wheel and keep it running smoothly. But I don't believe that Obama went in thinking - I'm
going to screw the voters. Nothing you can say or do that will change my mind. You would have to get hard proof for me to even consider it. He
may be a bit arrogant and self aggrandizing; but he's not a thief and
general all around bloodsucker - although if you said that of Cheney, I would believe it.

I still contend that he's made mistakes, especially in the early going
as a rookie president. Tell me, when was the last time you saw Congress
actually do something positive for the voters, or any American. No, Obama
doesn't get to escape the responsibility - with the president, the buck stops here.


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SGG
Doesn't play. Can you please type out a disabled version of the URL (add a space in between http: and // or something, we can paste it into our browsers and correct it.)

Quote:

Of course, all this is because of One Man......Obama. Ever since he stepped into office he has plotted and conspired with those rich corporations to their benefit and our detriment.
Whoever said it was ONE MAN? Haven't I said, over and over, that the responsibility for this clusterfuck has been shared throughout the past 70 years or so by Democrats AND Republicans? But just because responsibility is shared doesn't mean that Obama gets to escape from his portion of it, does it?

When I listened to Obama , it was one long passive-voiced excuse ("The bubblegum got all over the dog") with no mention of how past Presidents - Democrat and Republican alike - encouraged the very processes that withered the middle class.... The skewing of the tax structure (Reagan, Clinton, Bush), NAFTA/CAFTA (Clinton), China in the WTO (Bush II), etc etc.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 2:49 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


You really think that the problems the president faces, any president, not just Obama are little ones or little "gestures" - really!?

So Israelis and Palestinians killing each other are "little gestures." Curious. The leader of the Free World has, on his desk, little gestures.
That is hilarious!

Please, this was not a fully thought out response on my part, I find your comments incredulous. Did the president have a crack at history? Only time will tell. Currently though the ACA, no wait, I forgot you guys think the
ACA was established to line his pockets..........I have nothing. Sorry,
my bad.

So, you got me there. He had every opportunity to affect change.


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by second:
Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

Of course, all this is because of One Man......Obama.

There will come a time when they will pay for their avarice.
All of them, I may not be around to see it happen, but happen it will.
Let's put it this way, lots of these corporate fuckers will be jumping out of windows from their ivory towers.

Until then, Have A Nice Day!


SGG

A President could push "these corporate fuckers" out a window. Today. I'm certain it is not gonna happen soon enough, knowing how past Presidents acted.

There will be new President, another one that does not want to violently solve Big Problems because their days will be absorbed by little gestures, posturing, jokes or sympathy. Big Problems frighten them. Presidents voluntarily handle only small problems: a terror attack in Europe, a funeral for Jimmy Carter, a tornado in Kansas, Israelis killing Palestinians, filibusters, a drone-strike on a hospital in the Middle East, oil price fluctuations, Putin in Ukraine, an interview on Jimmy Kimmel Live!, whatever is flashy that day. All small problems that the President can only make gestures and have postures. But there are some Big Problems I'm not bothering myself to name that the next President could solve instead of running away from, if she cared to be bothered by the solutions. I can give you a historical example.

Civil and Voting Rights. Slavery. There were many Presidents before Lincoln that had nothing of substance to say about slavery. They talked, but that was about it until the South violently forced the problem upon the President's agenda. Lincoln would have preferred to spend his time dedicating monuments and making speeches in hopes that South would voluntarily restrain itself from violently spreading slavery to the new territories. Instead, Lincoln had to kill US citizens by the hundreds of thousands. Certainly wasn't on Lincoln's agenda when he was elected. It should have been.

Many Presidents before LBJ had nothing much to say about civil and voting rights. They talked but rioting forced the problem upon the President's attention. LBJ wasted his work days hoping that, with enough bombs, Robert McNamara would somehow or other solve JFK's Vietnam War. LBJ really didn't want to look like a chicken and simply abandon S.E. Asia. Instead, LBJ killed US citizens by the thousands. Certainly wasn't on LBJ's agenda when he was elected Vice-President. It should have been.

If LBJ had known how soon he'd be dead, anyway, or that staying in Vietnam would elect Nixon, he should have done the right thing. Too much to ask of LBJ, the old fool lacked imagination.

Now the USA has a younger fool. Obama is exactly like other Presidents, hoping the next President solves the Big Problems while Obama wastes his work days on whichever daily mini-crisis is absorbing all attention in the White House. It was too much to expect Obama to place Big Problems on his agenda before the problems become a crisis.

http://planetspectra.deviantart.com/art/Fruity-Oaty-Bar-shop-sign-2-26
6335653



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 3:07 AM

SHINYGOODGUY


Yes, the economic crisis and Obama's response. First, the crisis was man made, or better put, bank made. The architects of the BAILOUT pushed for legislation that would pretty much insure the banks survival.....now, my
question to you is this: Did Obama have anything to do with that?

Next topic, which I found to be strangely introduced in your response, or should I say, strangely transitioned. The ACA. Did you have a personal bad experience or are you just talking in general? Explain it to me.....What would be the best system and why?

I'm about out of time. See ya!


SGG


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
6-ix

My guess as to how things went is this: Obama promised so much because he really wanted to be president - not to do anything in particular, but to feel, finally. vindicated as being good enough, and to finally be accepted by people who matter. It wasn't political, it was personal.

I pretty much wrote off his initial response to the banking crisis as being any kind of meaningful marker of his aims. He didn't just step into a pile of shit, he sank in a septic tank with that. The crisis was rapidly unfolding, there were people in place who seemed to know what was going on, and there was a response already in progress. I don't think anyone could possibly be smart enough to grasp the complexities of the situation as quickly as required. (Though I personally did wonder at the time - if you want to make banks whole, why not just give money to mortgage holders to cover their loans? If you're going to give money away anyway, you might as well help people AND save the banks at the same time.) Overall, I thought that a better response was pretty impossible.

Instead, his direction became clear to me when he forbade the public option. It took a news article at that time to remind me how it all went, but it was like this: There was a VERY STRONG mandate for the 'single-payer' system, similar to Canada's. But that demographic was reassured that - though there was never going to be a single payer because, yanno, USA! USA! USA! - there for sure was going to be the public option. FOR SURE. So, don't worry single-payer folks, you've been heard. And it took ONE PRIVATE MEETING with insurance executives - and Obama, personally, in a speech, eliminated even the public option. Hence, our Frankenstein system was created.

It doesn't matter if he was threatened, or bribed, or both. Because more than ANYthing else, he just wanted to be one of 'them'. And, threat, bribe or both, they let him know that the public option stood in the way.

All that was quickly followed by (in no particular order) refusing to close Gitmo, expanding mass surveillance and building the surveillance data center in Utah, and expanding the drone program to include US citizens. He ordered his administration to cover up the extent of the BP/ Macondo/ Deepwater Horizon oil spill (I suppose if you use enough aliases after the fact you an obscure the guilty party) and used damaging methods to deal with it. The neocons got to run the State Department and set US policy for Israel, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and of course Ukraine. And he's shilling for TIPP etc,

I swear he loves him his drone strikes because it's the only thing they let him do on his own as president (unless of course he's willing to risk alienating 'them', which he isn't). Go get 'em, tiger! You show 'em what a powerful guy the president is! Take that!






SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 10:22 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
You really think that the problems the president faces, any president, not just Obama are little ones or little "gestures" - really!?

So Israelis and Palestinians killing each other are "little gestures." Curious. The leader of the Free World has, on his desk, little gestures.
That is hilarious!

SGG

Bill Clinton spent the last few months of his presidency negotiating a peace with Yasser Arafat. Clinton was wasting his time with empty gestures. Arafat was not going to come to any agreement with the Israelis because he would have been assassinated by Palestinians. I knew it. Clinton knew it. By the way, where is that promised peace? Peace is totally in the hands of the Israelis, not the president of the United States.

As far as being the Leader of the Free World, what kind of exemplary freedom is Obama demonstrating by not closing Guantánamo? Obama doesn't need Congress to close Guantánamo – so what's keeping him? "Leader of the Free World" is an empty concept. There is no Leader.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/12/obama-close-guant
anamo-without-congress


Presidents like to waste their time with foreign-policy because they have an almost completely free hand to do as they please. On the other hand, domestic policy, where presidents can do some real good for Americans, is neglected. Did you ever ask yourself why? It is not just because presidents have to deal with Congress. It is because a President who bombed and strafed Congress would end his life in jail. Presidents bombing and strafing overseas -- what happens to them? Nothing. Well, there are international conferences that Dick Cheney and Bush avoided because their lawyers don't want to test their immune-to-prosecution-for-war-crimes theory.

Mumbai crisis in 2008 that killed 167 people, the Madrid train bombings in 2004 that killed 191, or the siege of the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi that killed 67. Paris 2015. What can a President do? Nothing but show sympathy. What the President needs is a closet full of Hallmark Cards for every occasion. The President should sign the card, then get back to work. The State Department and John Kerry can handle the details of delivering the cards because the President has more important work to do than responding with a visit to the site of every tragic event in the entire world, a world he is not leader of.

www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/14/where-suicide-attacks-t
ake-place-in-one-chart
/


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 6:51 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

Yes, all presidents lie, cheat and steal; then line their pockets - especially vice presidents.
heh heh heh
Maybe that has something to do with the title of office? VICE President??

Quote:

But most of your focus has been on Obama and what he has DONE to the people of this country.
That's because Obama is President now. I know you don't know me, but if you were to read my past posts, you'd see that I was absolutely livid about Bush, and started out pretty hopeful and supportive about Obama.

Quote:

You have broadly stated that both sides are guilty of wrong-doing; but it is my contention that Obama did indeed start out with the idealistic notion that he could make a difference, and the promises.
We will never know about a person's true intentions, but either Bush lied or he was incompetent. It's the same with Obama- if he started out with good intentions he was incompetent in carrying them out. Or he was clueless about the Presidency and how to work it. Or he didn't have good intentions at all. None of this says anything good about him.

Quote:

That's why I always say that I hope a republican wins this time out, because they have no idea what they're in for. That's why you hear pundits say that Trump's Wall promise is a pipe dream; even Fox pundits smirk whenever they talk about such outlandish promises. It is not rocket science. You guys are right, there are certain things in place that a president must not mess with - Israel, Saudi Arabia, Oil companies, Big Banks, etc. Look at Congress, do you think they really give a shit about the voters - only when their jobs are on the line. Their cushy work 100 days a year jobs. Believe me, I know how it works, it's all rigged.

The bottom line is to keep the status quo, grease the wheel and keep it running smoothly. But I don't believe that Obama went in thinking - I'm going to screw the voters. Nothing you can say or do that will change my mind. You would have to get hard proof for me to even consider it. He may be a bit arrogant and self aggrandizing; but he's not a thief and general all around bloodsucker - although if you said that of Cheney, I would believe it.

From whence does this belief in Obama arise? What did Obama DO, exactly, that convinced you that he had good intentions?

Quote:

I still contend that he's made mistakes, especially in the early going as a rookie president. Tell me, when was the last time you saw Congress actually do something positive for the voters, or any American. No, Obama doesn't get to escape the responsibility - with the president, the buck stops here.
At this point, Obama should have SOME idea of how the Presidency works and how to get his agenda across. So, why is he still pushing for the TPP and the TTIP as his grande finale?

Yanno, we're trying to reach a conclusion about the inner workings of a person. I don't think we will ever finalize that.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 9:19 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


How about this formula to calculate Obama's next action? Obama is from the extinct Nelson Rockefeller liberal branch of the Republican Party. The branch did not actually die off. They became Democrats! Obama, Bill, Hillary, Al Gore, and Biden think alike because they are "Rockefeller Republicans".

I read a funny story about Rockefeller: “Nelson thought he was coming, but he was going.” That was one quip following the news that Nelson Rockefeller—New York’s four-term governor, former vice-president of the United States, and the most prominent scion of America’s most famous wealthy family—had succumbed to a heart attack at the age of 70, while in his midtown townhouse with his 25-year-old assistant, Megan Marshack. Preferred joke: How did Nelson Rockefeller die? Low blood pressure: 70 over 25.
http://nymag.com/news/features/scandals/nelson-rockefeller-2012-4/

http://party9999999.deviantart.com/art/The-Real-Obama-Posters-21764825
2


http://ezbadfish.deviantart.com/art/Jayne-Cobb-203345969

http://suigetsi.deviantart.com/art/Barack-Obama-Hope-526178158

http://markyboy01.deviantart.com/art/obamicons-Malcolm-Reynolds-157031
711


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 9:38 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.



The architects of the BAILOUT pushed for legislation that would pretty much insure the banks survival.....now, my question to you is this: Did Obama have anything to do with that?



For better or worse, I pretty much wrote off his responsibility for the first 6 months of FISCAL response. Maybe even for the first year. It was out of his hands.

His refusal to investigate banks and loan companies with an eye toward prosecution? Refusal to investigate the Bush/ Cheney administration for war crimes? Refusal to close Gitmo? His role takes a lot more explaining.


Next topic, which I found to be strangely introduced in your response, or should I say, strangely transitioned. The ACA. Did you have a personal bad experience or are you just talking in general? Explain it to me.....What would be the best system and why?



The first part of my professional life was spent in the medical system. Heck, even while I was going through school I worked as an EKG technician (where I also covered all the 'codes'), as a medical technologist, and (hospital laboratory) computer programmer. How the medical system works, or doesn't work, has been of great interest to me for many decades, intellectually, as a provider, and as a consumer. Also, I've been lucky enough to know Canadian medical professionals, researchers, and patients. And even now, where I work, there are many international professionals who've lived under various European systems, and the US system. So - I like to think I have a lot of data to work with.

I hope I don't have to go through 'what doesn't work in the US system'. High numbers have been uninsured, medical expenses are the most common cause of personal bankruptcy, measures of 'outcomes' like infant death rates and lifespan are worse than any other developed country (and even worse than some third world countries), and per capita cost (and remember, many people are NOT covered in the US) is twice that of what's arguably the next most expensive system of a major country, which is Canada. And once you 'time out' of the existing system and into Medicare, you'll find life-saving care, like home care and chronic nursing home care, isn't covered.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/06/16/once-
again-u-s-has-most-expensive-least-effective-health-care-system-in-survey
/

So, what would be a better system? Literally almost anything any other developed country has - even England's, a medical system many think is a failed one. But Canada's system would be a vast improvement over what we have.

Obamacare was supposed to fix all the problems by making health insurance mandatory so that low-risk children's premiums would cover higher risk adults, and, presumably, the lower risk children would get preventative care and make them low-risk adults. And insurance was supposed to be structured so that testing for common illnesses - cancer, diabetes (age-related), high blood pressure and high cholesterol was free.

Mandatory insurance has made uninsured percentages drop, it's true.

But when it comes to TREATING those diseases you get screened for for free, you're still at the mercy of the insurance company. And when it comes to catastrophic illness, you're pretty much sunk. You'll have to spend all your money, at which point you might be eligible for Medicaid.

When it comes to premiums, the idea that low-risk children's insurance would drop the price for higher-risk adults didn't pan out. I don't see a drop in premiums - do you?



As for medical costs, oddly enough I can find NO per capita figures for the US for 2013 and 2014, before and after Obamacare. It's a strange disappearing act. You'd think (I'd think anyway) that the government would be all over that data. But you're welcome to try and look yourself. The salient metric I believe is per capita medical costs in inflation-adjusted dollars, not per gdp (since gdp goes up and down for all sorts of reasons - like banks gambling in the stock market - that have nothing to do with how much are total medical costs per person, in constant dollars).



Overall - no, Obamacare is not getting us what others countries get for less, and not what people need. But its shortcomings are a given I think. You have too many profit-making entities (ie insurance companies) adding their expenses to the total and sucking your health-care dollar into their pockets, making absolutely sure they get the maximum profit they can get away with, and making absolutely sure you get the minimum of what's being paid for. That's why we, still, pay far more and get far less than other countries with government-paid healthcare.







SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 16, 2015 10:38 PM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I once believed in the American Dream and thought if I worked hard enough.........


I was taught that bullshit, too.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, November 20, 2015 3:13 PM

SHINYGOODGUY


For better or worse, I pretty much wrote off his responsibility for the first 6 months of FISCAL response. Maybe even for the first year. It was out of his hands.

His refusal to investigate banks and loan companies with an eye toward prosecution? Refusal to investigate the Bush/ Cheney administration for war crimes? Refusal to close Gitmo? His role takes a lot more explaining.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hey Kiki,

I did a little digging and found a very good report on PBS's Frontline called The Untouchables, from January 2013, that talks about the financial meltdown and the DOJ's failure to bring the Wall Street sleezebags to justice. Well, criminal justice; apparently civil suits were brought. I'm going to attach a link to the
video (hopefully it works).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/untouchables/

ENJOY!


SGG

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2015 8:24 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:

ENJOY!

SGG

In a single tweet, Hillary promised that she would do little more than keep the President's chair warm until a full-blooded Republican is elected. It's the same promise Obama made, the one disbelieved by Republicans and overlooked by liberals.

Hillary Clinton's pledge to avoid middle-class tax hikes is bad news for progressive politics


https://twitter.com/TheBriefing2016/status/666721016467603456/photo/1

Hillary Clinton — like Barack Obama before her — won't be asking the 97 percent or so of American households that earn less than $250,000 a year to pay for liberal programs.

But offering a formal Grover Norquist–style pledge to never raise taxes, the way Obama and Hillary have, is destructive of the long-term possibilities of progressive governance. The best and most effective American social programs are used — and paid for — by everyone, creating a virtuous cycle that keeps them reasonably effective and reasonably popular.

Democratic communications professionals — including people who've worked for Obama and people who currently work for Hillary — swear the tax pledge is a political necessity. If that's true, it also speaks to a certain amount of intellectual bankruptcy in contemporary American liberalism. It's an ideology that stands for the creation of new government programs but won't stand up for the idea that these programs are actually sufficiently valuable to ask people to pay for them.

Two existing programs would have been blocked by Hillary's and Obama's "no middle-class tax hikes" principle — Social Security and Medicare.

They're extremely popular, not despite being the most expensive government programs around but because they are so expensive. These are not narrowly targeted welfare for the poorest or most deserving of senior citizens. They are broad programs that serve essentially all elderly Americans as a matter of right. That bolsters middle-class support for the programs, but it also enlists the middle class in actually using the programs and helping to ensure that they work well, creating a virtuous circle of public support and reasonably high-quality service delivery.
www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9780162/clinton-middle-class-tax

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2015 1:35 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


We may not need to repeal Obamacare, it may implode on its own.

The largest healthcare insurer in the USA is threatening to w/draw offering a plan via Obamacare. Why??? Because even the largest most experience, most-adept-at-making-a-profit insurance can't make money offa this clusterfuck. That's because the entire healthcare system - from the testing labs to the doctors to the prosthesis-makers to the pharmas ... and everyone in-between, like the real estate owners and hospital corporations and lunch trucks and tax accountants ... are all sucking on the teat of health care! It's a daisy-chain of profits! And that business at the end of it all ... the one that handles the payouts ... just can't carry all the bullshit and still make a profit too.

Single payer. The only way to fly.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2015 2:32 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

We may not need to repeal Obamacare, it may implode on its own.

That's what Republicans say. And you do realize they are liars from habit? What Republicans won't say for ideological reasons is that United HealthCare is incompetent and should go out of business. It would only be justice if Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" killed the private health insurance business.

From an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, the mouthpiece for Rupert Murdock, owner of FOX and canceller of Firefly:
Quote:

The reason the UnitedHealth disclosure jolted investors is that other insurers are almost certainly experiencing the same problems. Companies accountable to shareholders are not charities, and for all the new regulatory control that ObamaCare imposed on the industry, the government can’t force them to do business. (Not yet, anyway.) But the law is ever more obviously the Faustian bargain that we predicted and that insurers should have known better than to accept when they lobbied for the bill in 2009.

None of this means ObamaCare is rapidly “collapsing under its own weight,” as some Republican like to imagine. The entitlement will continue to trundle along, especially as it becomes ever more a vast Medicaid expansion. Commercial insurers are being displaced by Medicaid managed-care HMOs, with their ultra-narrow physician networks and closed drug formularies.

Then again, this trend is itself another symptom of decline. While liberals can continue to insist all is well, businesses don’t enjoy the same political luxury.

www.wsj.com/articles/unitedhealths-obamacare-reckoning-1448232440


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2015 3:48 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Hey SGG - THANKS!




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 23, 2015 3:55 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


So, I read a little bit about UnitedHealth and don't have links - take this for what its worth.

I think what's going on with UnitedHealth is that they're not making AS MUCH profit as they'd like, not that they're actually losing money. What's going on is that people with health issues are getting insurance, getting care, then dropping the insurance. That tells me that there was a huge unserved population who fell between regular insurance and Medicaid, in desperate need of health care. And they are, just now, getting something out of 'the best medical system in the world'.*

*Because - USA! USA! USA!




SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 24, 2015 9:19 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Quote:

The reason the UnitedHealth disclosure jolted investors is that other insurers are almost certainly experiencing the same problems. Companies accountable to shareholders are not charities, and for all the new regulatory control that ObamaCare imposed on the industry, the government can’t force them to do business. (Not yet, anyway.) But the law is ever more obviously the Faustian bargain that we predicted and that insurers should have known better than to accept when they lobbied for the bill in 2009.
In addition to UnitedHealthRipoff potentially bowing out, there are quite a number of non-profit health insurance cooperatives what have ALSO bowed out.

The problem with Obamacare is that it didn't take the sickness of the previously-uninsured into account, and its only fiddled around the margins of controlling healthcare costs.

I can imagine how "negotiations" SHOULD HAVE gone on between the Fed and some providers:

FED TO PHARMA: So, how much are you charging for this new anti-cancer drug?
PHARMA TO FED: Well, $1200 to $3200 per pill, depending on who we're marketing to.
F2P: We'll take a billion, at $10 each
P2F: How about $1000 each?
F2P: Okay, we'll pay $10.10 each.


The problem with Obamacare is that he didn't SOLVE THE PROBLEM. THe REAL problem with healthcare is that, like the financial services and real estate and military spending, since that's one of the few places where money is actually flowing through the sludge that is our economy, all of the parasites have sunk their teeth into it. You cannot build a viable sector when it's being bled dry for profits at every step.



--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 24, 2015 4:32 PM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

The problem with Obamacare is that he didn't SOLVE THE PROBLEM. THe REAL problem with healthcare is that, like the financial services and real estate and military spending, since that's one of the few places where money is actually flowing through the sludge that is our economy, all of the parasites have sunk their teeth into it. You cannot build a viable sector when it's being bled dry for profits at every step.

U.S. health care spending grew 3.6 percent in 2013, reaching $2.9 trillion or $9,255 per person. As a share of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, health spending accounted for 17.4 percent.

If you look at the World Health Organization you will see some kind of swindle by the medical profession in Tuvalu because 19.7% of its GDP is spent on Health Care. The USA is in second place at 17.1%. The USA needs and deserves to be in first place because its doctors went to expensive schools and they have student loans to pay.

From http://gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/health_financing/atl
as.html

GDP% on Health Care per Country
19.7% Tuvalu
17.1% United States of America
16.5% Marshall Islands
12.9% Netherlands
12.6% Micronesia (Federated States of)
11.8% Republic of Moldova
11.8% Sierra Leone
11.7% France
11.5% Lesotho
11.5% Switzerland
11.3% Germany
11.2% Belgium
11.1% Rwanda
11.0% Austria
10.9% Canada
10.8% Maldives
10.6% Denmark
10.6% Serbia
10.3% Japan
9.70% New Zealand
9.70% Sweden
9.60% Norway
9.40% Australian
9.40% Finland
9.10% Italy
9.10% United Kingdom

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, November 24, 2015 5:24 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


Second - as I mentioned earlier, you can't directly compare the US healthcare spending percent GDP against the percent GDP of other developed nations.
That's because those nations cover everybody whereas in the US at least 15% don't have coverage at all.
They also cover more things, like long-term nursing care, things that the US never has even dreamt of covering.
Because they cover everybody, and because they buy an expanded list of services, they buy more healthcare with the money they spend.
Also, their 'outcomes' are better in terms of population-wide metrics like infant mortality and lifespan compared to the US.

So, not only are they cheaper in percent GDP terms, they cover far more than the US, and they do a better job.





SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:09 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
Second - as I mentioned earlier, you can't directly compare the US healthcare spending percent GDP against the percent GDP of other developed nations.

The excessive US healthcare spending has all the signs of being designed as a welfare program, but not for the users of the program. The design is for the welfare of business. That is how it is in America. Obama is not the man to interfere with that welfare program. On the other hand, the legislators from the liberal branch of the Democratic party were willing to interfere. And thus did Romney-care become Obamacare, a program designed to benefit business as much as it helps people without health insurance.

It was no surprise that Republican legislators and governors would claim that Obamacare would destroy American. They have been panicking and declaring new programs unconstitutional since, well now I think about it, forever. And no surprise that business did not fight Obamacare because it was designed to expand their business with new spending.

So, here we are in America with every improvement being demagogued as unconstitutional. And every improvement being accepted by business once business gets its government payoff to shut-up their flapping tongues. That lucrative arrangement will endure because business will continue to pay close attention five days per week and voters only give the situation cursory attention every two years.

I'm slightly mystified why the same process doesn't happen more in other democracies. I guess it is because America will never accept second place to any country.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, November 30, 2015 7:38 PM

JAYNEZTOWN


Europe is done, the EU dream is imploding with this refugee thing

as for the great country of the USA, the States is not so good anymore at leading the world economy I will say it and call out the start of a mild crash in 2016, I think starting 2016 there is a chance the house of cards will begin to tumble, it won't be an all out dollar meltdown or economic collapse but I think it might be the begining of something worse unless serious changes are made.

the current system can not continue

some vids look and ideas to think of
what people have said on the issues

















a long broken cycle coming to a close
Hopefully they plug the hole, fix the damage, patch up the leaks and get the US ship sailing again

the Japanese international trading partner is also a weakness
Japan might be the trigger









NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, July 12, 2016 11:50 PM

1KIKI

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.


There's probably a better thread to put this in, but to continue an observation about UnitedHealth leaving Obamacare (and to rebut the republican notion that everything was just fine the way it was before) ...
when a lot of people don't get healthcare, it makes sense that you end up with a larger percentage of people who are sick, and of those who are sick, overall they tend to be sicker. And when they finally get access to healthcare, it should come as no surprise that their large numbers and complicated illnesses tend to be more expensive.
There just doesn't seem to be room in the business model for keeping costs down, dealing with lots of extra-sick people - AND making a profit.
Hence, UnitedHealth left (most of) the field.

Some information:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/us/health-insurance-affordable-care-
act.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news









Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, July 15, 2016 5:39 PM

JEWELSTAITEFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by 1kiki:
There's probably a better thread to put this in, but to continue an observation about UnitedHealth leaving Obamacare (and to rebut the republican notion that everything was just fine the way it was before) ...
when a lot of people don't get healthcare, it makes sense that you end up with a larger percentage of people who are sick, and of those who are sick, overall they tend to be sicker. And when they finally get access to healthcare, it should come as no surprise that their large numbers and complicated illnesses tend to be more expensive.
There just doesn't seem to be room in the business model for keeping costs down, dealing with lots of extra-sick people - AND making a profit.
Hence, UnitedHealth left (most of) the field.

Some information:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/10/us/health-insurance-affordable-care-
act.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news




I cannot determine from your post if you are pointing out the fact that, as previously explained by many, the fallacy of Obamacare monetary modeling is a complete fabrication - it was never intended to work. Or perhaps you were not going that far, just approaching that revelation.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 4, 2019 7:04 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


There are probably better threads to put this under ... but round about 2017 when figures should have been available for Obamacare, all I could find were measly tidbits that death rates for chronic diseases (diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, COPD, for example) had inched up under a fully-implemented Obamacare, while medical bankruptcy rates had refused to go down.

Medical bankruptcy rates are still as high as ever, and most people who file for bankruptcy have insurance.

storylinks

Americans Had To Borrow 88 Billion Dollars To Cover Their Medical Bills Last Year
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-04-03/americans-had-borrow-88-bill
ion-dollars-cover-their-medical-bills-last-year

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/02/07/despite-promises-aca-stud
y-shows-two-thirds-personal-bankruptcies-still-caused

Despite Promises of ACA, Study Shows Two-Thirds of Personal Bankruptcies Still Caused by Illness and Medical Bills

studylink
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304901?jou
rnalCode=ajph&
;
Medical Bankruptcy: Still Common Despite the Affordable Care Act

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 5, 2019 3:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


It's always interesting to go back and read old posts,

SGG and SECND were saner back then,

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 5, 2019 5:48 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


I didn't go back to re-read old posts except to try and place the topic in the right place.

I wanted to evaluate Obamacare and try to figure out if it did any good.

The two items I'm interested in are death rates (mortality) from chronic illness and medical bankruptcy. If Obamacare is working, death rates from chronic illness, and medical bankruptcies should be down. If they're not down, or even going up, then that needs an explanation.

I tried looking up diabetes, hypertension, asthma and COPD here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/diseases-and-conditions.htm because those are chronic conditions that need ongoing management. But the only trends data I could find was for diabetes. It indicated death rates have NOT gone down. I also found info on ER visits (if people are getting routine care ER visits should be down) but there were large gaps in the data so it was hard to interpret.

And according to the previously posted report, medical bankruptcies are at par with pre-Obamacare.

So, while percent uninsured has dropped in half https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2018/
demo/p60-264/figure2.pdf
it doesn't translate into either money or lives saved.

It might be that without Obamacare, we would be in desperate freefall in terms of health and economics. I haven't even though about how to figure that out.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 5, 2019 11:25 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Well, in terms of cost ... either to the individual/family or to the economy as a whole/percent of GDP ... Obamacare is NOT working, as far as I can tell.

There are at least two factors working against it

1) The first is that Obama's caving in to The Fed, and Obama's fiscal policies, both conspired to drive the wealth gap even higher. (Also, in many cities the real estate bubble is creating a housing affordability crisis.) That means that in some areas there is an opioid crisis driving death rates up (In poor economies, drinking and drugs increase dramatically.) and in other areas there's a huge homeless population ... which Obamacare is not about to reach.

2) Obamacare does nothing to control the overall cost of medical care delivery. That means even for the homed the cost of insurance is prohibitive, and many people choose to do without.

It's insane. Almost ANY program would have been better than the clusterfuck that is Obamacare.

I was skeptical but not overtly critical when Obama chose this path. Understanding that it was a complicated system with some redeeming features (such as the "pre-existing conditions" clause and the fact that insurances had to show that 85% of the premium was spent on medical care) I was ready to let it play out for few years and see how/whether it was an improvement over the previous clusterfuck.

For us, it turns out it didn't make any difference because - for us- the critical feaure is Medicare. But for others ... many individual success stories, but countervailed by the increasing number of homeless/addicted, which the program fails to reach. Whatever success the program has is being counervailed by failures; overall stats are likely to be a "wash" but meanwhile the cost o healthcare keeps going up.

It's an interesting and necessary topic, tho. I think we should look at where Obamacare has succeeded (individual stories and narrow sectors) and retain those best features, and look at where it has failed (also individual stories and narrow secotors, because I think we need to look at the stats with more granularity) and modify those.

OK, needs more thought!!


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 5, 2019 11:26 AM

REAVERFAN


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
I didn't go back to re-read old posts except to try and place the topic in the right place.

I wanted to evaluate Obamacare and try to figure out if it did any good.

The two items I'm interested in are death rates (mortality) from chronic illness and medical bankruptcy. If Obamacare is working, death rates from chronic illness, and medical bankruptcies should be down. If they're not down, or even going up, then that needs an explanation.

I tried looking up diabetes, hypertension, asthma and COPD here: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/diseases-and-conditions.htm because those are chronic conditions that need ongoing management. But the only trends data I could find was for diabetes. It indicated death rates have NOT gone down. I also found info on ER visits (if people are getting routine care ER visits should be down) but there were large gaps in the data so it was hard to interpret.

And according to the previously posted report, medical bankruptcies are at par with pre-Obamacare.

So, while percent uninsured has dropped in half https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2018/
demo/p60-264/figure2.pdf
it doesn't translate into either money or lives saved.

It might be that without Obamacare, we would be in desperate freefall in terms of health and economics. I haven't even though about how to figure that out.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 5, 2019 5:51 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Quote:

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, in terms of cost ... either to the individual/family or to the economy as a whole/percent of GDP ... Obamacare is NOT working, as far as I can tell.

There are at least two factors working against it

1) The first is that Obama's caving in to The Fed, and Obama's fiscal policies, both conspired to drive the wealth gap even higher. (Also, in many cities the real estate bubble is creating a housing affordability crisis.) That means that in some areas there is an opioid crisis driving death rates up (In poor economies, drinking and drugs increase dramatically.) and in other areas there's a huge homeless population ... which Obamacare is not about to reach.

2) Obamacare does nothing to control the overall cost of medical care delivery. That means even for the homed the cost of insurance is prohibitive, and many people choose to do without.

It's insane. Almost ANY program would have been better than the clusterfuck that is Obamacare.

I was skeptical but not overtly critical when Obama chose this path. Understanding that it was a complicated system with some redeeming features (such as the "pre-existing conditions" clause and the fact that insurances had to show that 85% of the premium was spent on medical care) I was ready to let it play out for few years and see how/whether it was an improvement over the previous clusterfuck.

For us, it turns out it didn't make any difference because - for us- the critical feaure is Medicare. But for others ... many individual success stories, but countervailed by the increasing number of homeless/addicted, which the program fails to reach. Whatever success the program has is being counervailed by failures; overall stats are likely to be a "wash" but meanwhile the cost o healthcare keeps going up.

It's an interesting and necessary topic, tho. I think we should look at where Obamacare has succeeded (individual stories and narrow sectors) and retain those best features, and look at where it has failed (also individual stories and narrow secotors, because I think we need to look at the stats with more granularity) and modify those.

OK, needs more thought!!


-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

There might be some other added issues. Back in 2017 when I looked at this, data was extremely hard to come by - and it was harder now. So I'm not going to spend a lot of time digging around for this item, but - in 2017 there was some tentative (one source, not robust) information that pre-Obamacare people's medical bankruptcies were in the high $80,000 range. but in 2017 people's medical bankruptcies were in the mid $60,000 range. I don't know if you could call that an improvement.
Also, drug costs have sky-rocketed, both for existing drugs whose prices have gone up in the thousands percent range (like the EpiPen); as well as for new lifesaving and curative drugs (like the various Hepatitis C cures and oncologic immunotherapies).
And finally, it's possible that Obamacare does a reasonable job covering the simple $2500+ 'broken arm set in a cast/ cast removal' ER visits, which would truly put the squeeze on family finances; but is far too underpowered for chronic life-threatening or catastrophic illnesses.

As to opioids: the opioid crisis has had the profound effect of actually lowering lifespan in whites two years in a row. To me that's mind-boggling. It takes a HUGE shift in a very small number to throw an entire average. (It may be that other communities have had a similar problem but it's been so longstanding it doesn't register as a recent change.)
I wasn't looking at that because for me it doesn't measure longstanding changes in healthcare delivery or cost.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Kamala Harris for President
Thu, October 31, 2024 19:06 - 592 posts
How do you like my garbage truck?
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:49 - 2 posts
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:47 - 236 posts
Trump on Joe Rogan: Full Podcast
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:05 - 7 posts
Israeli War
Thu, October 31, 2024 18:04 - 62 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:58 - 4657 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, October 31, 2024 17:45 - 4425 posts
Spooky Music Weird Horror Songs...Tis ...the Season...... to be---CREEPY !
Thu, October 31, 2024 16:19 - 56 posts
Sentencing Thread
Thu, October 31, 2024 15:11 - 381 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Thu, October 31, 2024 14:25 - 921 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, October 31, 2024 13:46 - 7408 posts
No matter what happens...
Wed, October 30, 2024 23:43 - 21 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL