Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #651  
Old 10-16-2019, 12:00 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trom View Post
If you can figure out a way to create an efficient market consisting only of end users without market makers/speculators you'll receive a Nobel Prize in economics. People want the ability to transact without waiting days/weeks/months/years for a counterparty to show up. Dealers are useful and have always existed.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misunderstood me rather than strawmanning me. I'm certainly not advocating the end of dealers or speculators. (And I can't remember how long you've been in the thread, but I'm no fan of Bernie Sanders, to put it mildly.)

Having a transaction tax would not end speculation. But it would have to be speculation based on spotting a potential growth stock early and holding onto it until it paid a nice profit, not sniping pennies from tiny fluctuations hour to hour or minute to minute.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #652  
Old 10-16-2019, 12:16 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
And yes, the financial services industry does add value. We’re not spending our days snorting cocaine off w key in the bathroom all day long. Sometimes it helps have someone that can talk to a retiree about a decision to liquidate their portfolio and put it all in gold because their nephew found the Ron Paul subreddit and became a true believer.

I said above that I did not intend to end speculation. "Money management", though? That really is a very dubious profession, I'm sorry. Sure, getting your money managed by a pro is probably going to be better than just buying a bunch of gold. But if money managers were really out for their clients' best interests, they'd have them simply invest in no-load index funds. Of course, the problem is that doing so would not support the managers' continuing to have a full time, decent paying job. Active management makes the managers money, but it hurts clients in the aggregate. This has been exhaustively proven in many studies.


Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
But what public good do stock traders provide? How do they contribute to the economy? Where does their income come from? How do they differ from professional poker players?

As a wannabe poker pro ("wannabe" because I could never get my hourly earn high enough, and then Black Friday hit--but my net lifetime profit from poker is in the low five figures), I bristle slightly at this question, but it's a not unreasonable one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
All together what are annual profits and expenses of professional stock traders? Wild guess: $100+ billion. This is siphoning off much brain talent that could be used in teaching, science, engineering, governance, law, public service, etc.

Excellent point.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #653  
Old 10-16-2019, 10:56 AM
Trom is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misunderstood me rather than strawmanning me. I'm certainly not advocating the end of dealers or speculators. (And I can't remember how long you've been in the thread, but I'm no fan of Bernie Sanders, to put it mildly.)

Having a transaction tax would not end speculation. But it would have to be speculation based on spotting a potential growth stock early and holding onto it until it paid a nice profit, not sniping pennies from tiny fluctuations hour to hour or minute to minute.
Dealers/traders/market makers aren't in the business of analyzing companies and investing, though. They're supplying liquidity on demand and getting paid for accepting that risk.

I guess I just don't understand the argument that how long someone holds on to something comes with an sliding ethical scale. What's the tipping point for acceptable vs. sinful timeframes? And why?
  #654  
Old 10-17-2019, 11:55 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Just swinging by to let everyone know the never bernie crowd and people trying to appeal to identity politics isn't working, you guys are going to vote Bernie Sanders in the general election, and when you do I want you to remember what I said.
  #655  
Old 10-18-2019, 03:12 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,745
I'm going to vote for the Democratic nominee in the general election. Not Bernie Sanders, silly.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #656  
Old 10-18-2019, 10:06 AM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
Can I ask the flip question? If you support Bernie Sanders, why do you support him?

Is it because you like his proposals?
Is it because you hate "the system"?
Is it because he's a charismatic person?
Something else?

Last edited by puzzlegal; 10-18-2019 at 10:07 AM.
  #657  
Old 10-18-2019, 10:30 AM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 86,251
I'm frankly surprised you didn't give "Because I love his mellifluous voice" as an option.
  #658  
Old 10-18-2019, 11:15 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Just swinging by to let everyone know the never bernie crowd and people trying to appeal to identity politics isn't working
What about all the people who have put forward substantive reasons why Bernie is not their preferred candidates - you know, the ones whose posts you've largely ignored. Who will we be voting for?

I stand by my points set out in post #18, with the note that although he has apparently resolved the first point about not being a Democrat, there have been persuasive arguments to suggest that point #5 isn't really valid and Sanders hasn't actually been that effective in Congress...which is an even stronger argument against voting for Bernie.

I can't stop you from dismissing all criticism of Sanders' shortcomings as "identity politics" and irrational opposition, but it will certainly affect how much credence is given to your own arguments.
  #659  
Old 10-18-2019, 12:04 PM
Procrustus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Just swinging by to let everyone know the never bernie crowd and people trying to appeal to identity politics isn't working, you guys are going to vote Bernie Sanders in the general election, and when you do I want you to remember what I said.
I don't know what this means. (underline added)
  #660  
Old 10-18-2019, 01:46 PM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
And yes, if it ends up Trump vs. Bernie, I will vote for Bernie. But I'm not expecting that, and I'll be voting for someone else in the primary.
  #661  
Old 10-18-2019, 04:01 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 12,745
I will say again: I categorically reject the premise that presidential nominees must be chosen based on who has the best ideology or set of policy proposals. Presidents are policymakers, but they are also spokesmodels, and there’s no sense pretending otherwise.
  #662  
Old 10-23-2019, 09:30 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
What about all the people who have put forward substantive reasons why Bernie is not their preferred candidates - you know, the ones whose posts you've largely ignored. Who will we be voting for?

I stand by my points set out in post #18, with the note that although he has apparently resolved the first point about not being a Democrat, there have been persuasive arguments to suggest that point #5 isn't really valid and Sanders hasn't actually been that effective in Congress...which is an even stronger argument against voting for Bernie.

I can't stop you from dismissing all criticism of Sanders' shortcomings as "identity politics" and irrational opposition, but it will certainly affect how much credence is given to your own arguments.
I don't dismiss criticisms of bernie, I disagree with his position on decriminalizing hard drugs, I think they should be legalized.

If someone brings up "hes an old white man" that kind of thing is just identity politics, racism, and ageism, and has no merit. Often centrists on these boards resort to such low brow attacks of Bernie because they know they cannot refute how much of an incredible legislator the guy is.

No one on these boards has definitively proven that our current healthcare system is better than M4A. No one has proven why we should allow BPMs to negotiate drug prices with manufacturers while the government puts regulations on manufactures to increase cost of production allowing them to monopolize and inflate prices along with the insurance BPMs who are happy to so they can charge americans more. No one has shown why Bernies SS expansion bill would be bad in any capacity.

What most of these guys in this thread have been doing is the same shit Republicans do to their beloved centrist candidates for years. It's odd how opposed most of straightdope is to republicans yet they use the same tactics when they're forced into a corner and cannot rely on facts or reasoning, instead their assert their own truths as facts and convince themselves running a centrist against trump will be any different from 2016 when a large portion of votes went to independents and some even to trump.
  #663  
Old 10-23-2019, 09:33 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I don't know what this means. (underline added)
Appealing to people with the argument Bernie is old white male so we need a slightly less old less white female.

(btw im pretty sure u know what that means, you just want to be combative as most people in this thread and avoid the substance)

Last edited by Barack Obama; 10-23-2019 at 09:33 PM.
  #664  
Old 10-23-2019, 11:20 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Ok, one thing that is pissing me off about Bernie. His UHC plan.

He is calling it "Medicare for all" but it doesnt have anything to do with Medicare. It's a pure socialized medicine plan.

That's fine, but others want a true Medicare for all plan, and he has deliberately poisoned the well.
  #665  
Old 10-24-2019, 09:02 AM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I will say again: I categorically reject the premise that presidential nominees must be chosen based on who has the best ideology or set of policy proposals. Presidents are policymakers, but they are also spokesmodels, and there’s no sense pretending otherwise.
I agree with this. And they are also executives. They have to get stuff done. They also end up being faced with moral decisions that affect the nation, but that may not have been on anyone's radar duing the election.

So I do care about their ideology, and what their moral instincts are. But I also care that they are good managers and charismatic. That's why, if all else were equal, I'd vote for the governor over the senator. And I think Obama's prior job as "community organizer" was an important credential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
...If someone brings up "hes an old white man" that kind of thing is just identity politics, racism, and ageism, and has no merit. Often centrists on these boards resort to such low brow attacks of Bernie because they know they cannot refute how much of an incredible legislator the guy is...
I don't care that he's white and male, but I do think he's too old. It takes a huge amount of physical energy to be the president, and while he has that now, the odds are that he won't be able to keep it up through his term.

Of course, we have a vice president for a reason. And if I really liked him for other reasons, I would overlook his age. But I don't.

Speaking of which, please fight my ignorance. You say he is an incredible legislator. Can you tell me what he has accomplished as a legislator? Because I have the impression that he's been an unusually ineffective legislator who has accomplished very little. Especially given how long he's held his current job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
...He is calling it "Medicare for all" but it doesnt have anything to do with Medicare. It's a pure socialized medicine plan...
Serious question: What is the difference between medicare and socialized medicine, other than the age limits on medicare?
  #666  
Old 10-24-2019, 12:39 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Medicare is a specific program, "socialized medicine" is just a very general descriptor. The thrust of the criticism is that the "Medicare for all" legislation bears little resemblance to current Medicare.
  #667  
Old 10-24-2019, 12:55 PM
John_Stamos'_Left_Ear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,822
Politifact: Medicare for All: What it is, what it isn't
  #668  
Old 10-24-2019, 03:42 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
...

Serious question: What is the difference between medicare and socialized medicine, other than the age limits on medicare?
Medicare consists of 4 parts: A Hospital Insurance, which is "free". B medical, like walk in visits to MD- a modest monthly charge, say $150. C Medicare advantage or supplemental- offered by most health plans, it covers what Parts A&B dont, with maybe a small co-pay. Costs vary
D= drugs.

Medicare operates just fine with private insurance. Part C is Private insurance. Or maybe you want cadillac care or no waiting time, - some people just buy private insurance. That's Ok.

A true Medicare for all plan would be covered easily by charging companies a tax about equal to what they pay now to cover their employees health plans. You'd have small premiums, but your company may well pay them too.

Sanders plan has none of that. Everyone is totally covered, no premiums, and all private insurance companies are outlawed. It is NOT, in any way shape or form "Medicare".

  #669  
Old 10-24-2019, 07:40 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you just misunderstood me rather than strawmanning me. I'm certainly not advocating the end of dealers or speculators. (And I can't remember how long you've been in the thread, but I'm no fan of Bernie Sanders, to put it mildly.)

Having a transaction tax would not end speculation. But it would have to be speculation based on spotting a potential growth stock early and holding onto it until it paid a nice profit, not sniping pennies from tiny fluctuations hour to hour or minute to minute.
JFTR, Trom joined the thread on October 11. Not sure if I've joined it before this post. I'll go check.

ETA: Nope, this is my first post. Normally I'd be reluctant to bother reading an entire thread by starting when it's fourteen pages long, but I just found out that my state is going to be part of Super Tuesday, so I thought maybe I'd better bring myself up to speed.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 10-24-2019 at 07:44 PM.
  #670  
Old 10-24-2019, 07:47 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Give me reasons why you would not support Sanders as president. His SS expansion bill seems pretty good to me, his M4A bill seems pretty good to me, and I agree with pretty much every position he has. Such as criminals having the right to vote, and in prison. Or such as people being automatically registered to vote when they turn 18.

Now I understand if someone has issues with his specific healthcare proposal, maybe you think a system like Germany's would work better in america, I don't know you tell me. Any arguments about his viability as a democratic front runner I throw out the window. I wont entertain any notions of biden being a better front runner than sanders, we tried a center-right candidate in 2016 and she got obliterated. I want to know specifics about what you don't support that bernie has proposed, and what other candidates propose that you believe is better. This isn't about what you think is best for dem party, this is about what you thinks best for America. Specifics.
(I'm well aware most dopers are center-left, that's why I want specifics not vague speculations about Americans feelings towards an old white male whos a self proclaimed democratic socialist)
If they're in prison for voting fraud, should they STILL keep the franchise?

IYHO.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 10-24-2019 at 07:47 PM.
  #671  
Old 10-24-2019, 08:51 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
He's been consistent on nearly every position he's held since entering office. He's virtually untouched by corporate money, pacs, hedge funds, etc... He's proposed new ideas in our country, such as free college tuition, universal healthcare, so when you sit there are list of mundane reasons for why Sanders is not electable, please explain why nearly every democratic candidate is running on the positions he introduced in 2016?

I'll tell you why, and you already know why. Because the American people overwhelmingly support Bernie Sander's proposals. Do you really want to get into how electable Sanders is? I'm not going to have this debate if you want to bring up "he lost to hillary" while ignoring the fact every delegate appointed by the DNC voted for hillary, while every non appointed delegate voted Sanders. I also wont have the debate if you're going to fall back on he's not a democrat, you're god damn right he's not a democrat he's a leftist, a real leftist. Not this center right corporate bs the democratic party embodies.

I'm aware dopers are centrists, and I love it that Bernie Sanders triggers centrist who want to pretend like they're leftists. You're no better than a republican if you think you can find the middle ground on every issue. Sorry but in real life, there are sides. You can either let those in power have their way, or you can practice dissidence. Obama spouted change, but he played the role that the democratic party plays. Center right bipartisanship pandering to republicans on nearly every issue. The democratic party if it wants to survive and not get eaten alive, needs to embrace the likes of Bernie Sanders, AOC, Ro Khanna, etc...

Let me make one other thing clear, if it wasn't for Bernie Sanders, do you really believe corporate media would be even mentioning universal healthcare, free college tuition, or raising the minimum wage for the first time in a decade? I don't, and I don't think any rational person would either.
Excuse me? WTF is a NON-appointed delegate? Do NON-appointed delegates include delegates awarded to Hillary on the basis that she won the primaries from the states represented by those delegates?

Yes, I am proud to call myself a centrist. But I take issue with any assertion that I pretend to be a leftist (however much the radical reactionaries of the extreme Right insist that I actually am one).

There are also unexcluded middles. And any position founded on the notion that there AREN'T, or that I don't recognize when an issue ONLY has two sides (of which MINE is the objectively correct one ) is hardly worth my time.

Sorry, I acknowledge that you said you wouldn't accept it as an answer, but if Sanders wants to be the face of the Democratic Party, he really ought to become a member. As for AOC, I like her and generally support what she wants to do. And as for Ro Khanna; WHO?

Pretty sure they would, because AOC. Unless you think AOC wouldn't have brought those up without Bernie's imprimatur. Do you think that?
  #672  
Old 10-24-2019, 08:56 PM
kayT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,241
Why are you colorizing everything, kaylasdad99? And is it considered ok to colorize things in quotes that the original poster did not color?
  #673  
Old 10-24-2019, 09:09 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayT View Post
Why are you colorizing everything, kaylasdad99? And is it considered ok to colorize things in quotes that the original poster did not color?
I colored each paragraph with the same color of the OP's comment that it was responding to.

And I'm pretty sure it's kosher.
  #674  
Old 10-24-2019, 09:36 PM
kayT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
I colored each paragraph with the same color of the OP's comment that it was responding to.

And I'm pretty sure it's kosher.
When I look at the OP's comment you quoted, I see no colors at all.
  #675  
Old 10-24-2019, 10:09 PM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
If they're in prison for voting fraud, should they STILL keep the franchise?

IYHO.
I am not who you asked, but yes, I think people in prison should keep the franchise, even people convicted of voting fraud. Why not?

In a properly run state, there won't be enough people in prison to make a significant impact. And in an improperly run state, I don't want the state to easily ALSO disenfranchise people be stripping them of their voting rights.

That being said, I feel much more strongly that felons who have served their time be able to vote. And a persuasive argument against prisoners voting is that they are more vulnerable to being pressured to vote in a way that pleases their jailors than any other group is vulnerable to such coercion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kayT View Post
Why are you colorizing everything, kaylasdad99? And is it considered ok to colorize things in quotes that the original poster did not color?
He did it so you can see which part of the post she is answering with each part of his response. I thought it was very clever, and might copy it.

Last edited by puzzlegal; 10-24-2019 at 10:10 PM.
  #676  
Old 10-24-2019, 10:12 PM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
And as for Ro Khanna; WHO?
Ro Khanna is a representative for California's 17th congressional district. He is also a national co-chair of Bernie Sanders' 2020 Presidential campaign.
  #677  
Old 10-24-2019, 10:20 PM
Procrustus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Appealing to people with the argument Bernie is old white male so we need a slightly less old less white female.

(btw im pretty sure u know what that means, you just want to be combative as most people in this thread and avoid the substance)
I’m a fairly old white guy and I don’t see anything wrong with preferring someone other than an old white guy as our nominee. All things being otherwise equal. That’s not my main objection to Bernie. But I don’t see it as “Identity Politics” (which I view as a meaningless term in all situations)
  #678  
Old 10-24-2019, 10:52 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by kayT View Post
When I look at the OP's comment you quoted, I see no colors at all.
Really?

Are you using Sultantheme?

I mean, if my method doesn't show up for certain posters, I guess I'll have to break up the quotes I'm responding to.

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 10-24-2019 at 10:54 PM.
  #679  
Old 10-24-2019, 11:20 PM
Chisquirrel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,663
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Excuse me? WTF is a NON-appointed delegate? Do NON-appointed delegates include delegates awarded to Hillary on the basis that she won the primaries from the states represented by those delegates?
It's pure bullshit. It's false information designed to imply that the DNC literally cheated its members of out the democratic (small d) choice of nominee. It ignores that Clinton (D) got more votes than Sanders (I), won more states, won more delegates even before "superdelegates", and that Sanders' campaign repeatedly advocated for those same "superdelegates" to vote AGAINST the democratic (small d) choice of Clinton when it became the only way he could win.

That alone is why I refuse to support Sanders against literally any Democratic party member, and why I contend he's more of a parasite on the party than the "face" of it.
  #680  
Old 10-25-2019, 01:26 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
... I'm not going to have this debate if you want to bring up "he lost to hillary" while ignoring the fact every delegate appointed by the DNC voted for hillary, while every non appointed delegate voted Sanders. ....
As usual the super delegates mostly voted for the winning candidate- which was Hillary by a large margin. However, 45 of the superdelegates did express support for Bernie before the election was overwhelmingly decided at the polls - the VOTERs voting about 17Million for Clinton but only 13m for Sanders.


And the super delegates made no difference what-so-ever. The vote was 2842 to 1865 with 571 supers for Hillary and 45 for bernie. She won without the support of the Superdelegates.

And if every "non appointed delegate (had) voted Sanders" he would have won 4091 to 615.

You post displays a profound ignorance of how superdelegates work and the actual results of the primary.

This is anyone reason why many of us dont like Bernie- his supporters and their "we wuz robbed" ideas. He lost- fair and square.

Sanders actually only did well in the highly UN-democratic caucus primaries.
  #681  
Old 10-25-2019, 01:28 AM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
Ro Khanna is a representative for California's 17th congressional district. He is also a national co-chair of Bernie Sanders' 2020 Presidential campaign.

Khanna is a notorious carpetbagger who couldnt win a election in a contested district, so he kept challenging moderates dems in their safe districts.
  #682  
Old 10-25-2019, 01:40 AM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Excuse me? WTF is a NON-appointed delegate? Do NON-appointed delegates include delegates awarded to Hillary on the basis that she won the primaries from the states represented by those delegates?

Yes, I am proud to call myself a centrist. But I take issue with any assertion that I pretend to be a leftist (however much the radical reactionaries of the extreme Right insist that I actually am one).

There are also unexcluded middles. And any position founded on the notion that there AREN'T, or that I don't recognize when an issue ONLY has two sides (of which MINE is the objectively correct one ) is hardly worth my time.

Sorry, I acknowledge that you said you wouldn't accept it as an answer, but if Sanders wants to be the face of the Democratic Party, he really ought to become a member. As for AOC, I like her and generally support what she wants to do. And as for Ro Khanna; WHO?

Pretty sure they would, because AOC. Unless you think AOC wouldn't have brought those up without Bernie's imprimatur. Do you think that?
For the record AOC says Bernie help motivate her to get into politics, and all these democratic candidates wouldn't be running on the literal name of Bernies bill if he didn't push so hard for his policies.
  #683  
Old 10-25-2019, 01:43 AM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Ok, one thing that is pissing me off about Bernie. His UHC plan.

He is calling it "Medicare for all" but it doesnt have anything to do with Medicare. It's a pure socialized medicine plan.

That's fine, but others want a true Medicare for all plan, and he has deliberately poisoned the well.
It's a NHI healthcare model that aims to diminish reliance on private health insurance. It's a literal overhaul and expansion of Medicare.


Edit: Can we let this thread die and get a more productive one going? Thanks.

Last edited by Barack Obama; 10-25-2019 at 01:46 AM.
  #684  
Old 10-25-2019, 03:28 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Edit: Can we let this thread die and get a more productive one going? Thanks.
Please start one. I don't know enough about Bernie's policies to respond to people in a thread, but I would be interested in discussing some of his policies.
  #685  
Old 10-25-2019, 03:43 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
Really?

Are you using Sultantheme?

I mean, if my method doesn't show up for certain posters, I guess I'll have to break up the quotes I'm responding to.
I think s/he means that the post you quoted and colorized, as originally posted (post #8), had no colors in it.

I rather think it's a nifty way to respond to a full quote piecemeal, without the bother of breaking up the original quote, and without any changing of the sense of the post.

Last edited by galen ubal; 10-25-2019 at 03:44 AM.
  #686  
Old 10-25-2019, 03:50 AM
galen ubal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Central VIC Australia
Posts: 2,758
Sorry for the double post

Come to think of it, I've done a similar thing a time or two - colorized a particular section of a quote when I wanted to highlight it rather than just bolding it - I find it's easier to see that way. I usually add {emphasis mine} afterwards, just to make it clear.
  #687  
Old 10-25-2019, 07:15 AM
kayT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Austin
Posts: 5,241
Yes, kaylasdad99, the original post was not colorized on my screen. Only yours. I don't mind if a mod colorizes his note in red so it's more noticeable, but colorizing someone else's post, it seems to me, should be noted, as is done when something is bolded (e.g. "bolding mine") just for clarity.
  #688  
Old 10-25-2019, 08:48 AM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
kayT, seeing as her color-coded replies matched the colors the added to the post, it seemed self-explanatory to me. It never occurred to me that the colors had been in the original. And I would certainly not feel I had been misrepresented had someone done that to one of my posts.

I may wait and see of anyone else objects before stealing the idea, but I think it was brilliant.
  #689  
Old 10-25-2019, 02:29 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
It's a NHI healthcare model that aims to diminish reliance on private health insurance. It's a literal overhaul and expansion of Medicare.


.
It has no relation to medicare at all. Period. None, zilch, zip, nada.

And in NHI you can have private insurance, if you like.

Last edited by DrDeth; 10-25-2019 at 02:29 PM.
  #690  
Old 10-25-2019, 02:30 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
kayT, seeing as her color-coded replies matched the colors the added to the post, it seemed self-explanatory to me. It never occurred to me that the colors had been in the original. And I would certainly not feel I had been misrepresented had someone done that to one of my posts.

I may wait and see of anyone else objects before stealing the idea, but I think it was brilliant.
It works for me.
  #691  
Old 10-25-2019, 02:33 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Edit: Can we let this thread die and get a more productive one going? Thanks.
I have no idea why you think a new thread would be any different at all.
  #692  
Old 10-25-2019, 03:06 PM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
kayT, seeing as her color-coded replies matched the colors the added to the post, it seemed self-explanatory to me. It never occurred to me that the colors had been in the original. And I would certainly not feel I had been misrepresented had someone done that to one of my posts.

I may wait and see of anyone else objects before stealing the idea, but I think it was brilliant.
”Her?” Check my handle again.

That said, thank you for the kind words.
  #693  
Old 10-26-2019, 08:39 PM
Barack Obama is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It has no relation to medicare at all. Period. None, zilch, zip, nada.

And in NHI you can have private insurance, if you like.
Um, the M4A bill is based on a NHI model. Under M4A you still would have private insurance, it just diminishes the reliance for it so private insurance is just for additional benefits for things such as cosmetics or grey areas where M4A may not cover usually requiring some kind of cosmetic treatment.
  #694  
Old 10-26-2019, 09:51 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 42,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
Um, the M4A bill is based on a NHI model. Under M4A you still would have private insurance, it just diminishes the reliance for it so private insurance is just for additional benefits for things such as cosmetics or grey areas where M4A may not cover usually requiring some kind of cosmetic treatment.

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/10/183044...dicare-for-all
The Sanders plan envisions a future in which all Americans have health coverage and pay nothing out of pocket when they visit the doctor. His plan, the Medicare for All Act, describes a benefit package that is more generous than what other single-payer countries, like Canada, currently offer their residents and includes new income taxes on both employees and employers...It would bar employers from offering separate plans that compete with this new, government-run option...The plan is significantly more generous than the single-payer plans run by America’s peer countries. The Canadian health care system, for example, does not cover vision or dental care, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, or home health services. Instead, two-thirds of Canadians take out private insurance policies to cover these benefits. The Netherlands has a similar set of benefits (it also excludes dental and vision care), as does Australia.

What’s more, the Sanders plan does not subject consumers to any out-of-pocket spending on health aside from prescriptions drugs. This means there would be no charge when you go to the doctor, no copayments when you visit the emergency room. All those services would be covered fully by the universal Medicare plan.

This, too, is out of line with many international single-payer systems, which often require some payment for seeking most services. .......The plan is significantly more generous than the single-payer plans run by America’s peer countries. The Canadian health care system, for example, does not cover vision or dental care, prescription drugs, rehabilitative services, or home health services. Instead, two-thirds of Canadians take out private insurance policies to cover these benefits. The Netherlands has a similar set of benefits (it also excludes dental and vision care), as does Australia.

What’s more, the Sanders plan does not subject consumers to any out-of-pocket spending on health aside from prescriptions drugs. This means there would be no charge when you go to the doctor, no copayments when you visit the emergency room. All those services would be covered fully by the universal Medicare plan.

This, too, is out of line with many international single-payer systems, which often require some payment for seeking most services. Taiwan’s single-payer system charges patients when they visit the doctor or the hospital (although it includes an exemption for low-income patients). In Australia, people pay 15 percent of the cost of their visit with any specialty doctor....Medicare, employer coverage, and these other countries show that nearly every insurance scheme we’re familiar with covers a smaller set of benefits with more out-of-pocket spending on the part of citizens. Private insurance plans often spring up to fill these gaps (in Canada, for example, vision and dental insurance is often sponsored by employers, much like in the United States)....The big question Sanders doesn’t answer: How do you pay for it?
  #695  
Old 10-26-2019, 11:30 PM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 18,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
If they're in prison for voting fraud, should they STILL keep the franchise?
Sure, why not ? Ya think they'll be fixing their cell votes or something ?
  #696  
Old 10-26-2019, 11:50 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 41,091
"Bernie Sanders is vowing to stay in the race until the Democratic convention. He says he owes it all to his supporters, who need something to do until Burning Man." –- Conan O'Brien
__________________
The two most interesting things in the world: Other people's sex lives and your own money.
  #697  
Old 10-27-2019, 12:15 AM
puzzlegal's Avatar
puzzlegal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4,907
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
”Her?” Check my handle again.

That said, thank you for the kind words.
I thought I'd edited that to fit it. Sorry. The "Kayla" part comes first, and sounds feminine to me.
  #698  
Old 10-27-2019, 12:32 AM
dalej42 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
It's a NHI healthcare model that aims to diminish reliance on private health insurance. It's a literal overhaul and expansion of Medicare.


Edit: Can we let this thread die and get a more productive one going? Thanks.
Yes, I think it’s a good idea to reboot the threads every couple of months or so if not sooner. Massive threads discourage new input and more people will start tuning in as we move closer to Iowa. I’m sure we all got plenty of 100 days to Iowa emails today!
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #699  
Old 10-27-2019, 09:20 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,219
Quote:
Originally Posted by puzzlegal View Post
I thought I'd edited that to fit it. Sorry. The "Kayla" part comes first, and sounds feminine to me.
Don't worry about it; it happens.



(a lot more frequently than I had anticipated twenty years ago, bit still)

Last edited by kaylasdad99; 10-27-2019 at 09:21 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017