Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 02-10-2020, 12:42 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweepkick View Post
Can you explain what you mean when you say $10000/yr is five times what your healthcare costs are?

Are you saying you pay the full cost of your own healthcare entirely by yourself, and that it runs around $166.66 per month?
More or less.

Yes, I know, the employer pays also. But you see- that has nothing whatsoever to do with what my personal tax burden would be.
  #152  
Old 02-10-2020, 12:46 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
That's just mealy mouthed nonsense. Medicare for All was promoted as an alternative to the Public Option (which is what Medicare for All Who Want it functionally is). All of the bills for M4A was an all encompassing health care plan - after all, as Senator Sanders likes to constantly say "I wrote the damn bill".
Look, some people like the idea of Medicare for All. Real MFA. Not Sander's plan.

But altho sanders has NAMED his plan Medicare for all- it bears no relation whatsoever to medicare.
  #153  
Old 02-10-2020, 03:26 PM
BigAppleBucky's Avatar
BigAppleBucky is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island
Posts: 2,410
The GOP campaign against Buttigieg is easy to predict. They'll dredge up a group of aggrieved folks from South Bend (there are bound to be some) and get them to say Mayor Pete is the worst thing since the Black Death. So simple for them.
  #154  
Old 02-10-2020, 03:32 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Look, some people like the idea of Medicare for All. Real MFA. Not Sander's plan.

But altho sanders has NAMED his plan Medicare for all- it bears no relation whatsoever to medicare.
Buttigieg knew EXACTLY what Medicare For All was when he answered that question. Sanders had been advocating for it for 3 years at that point. Warren was asked about it when she entered the race - before Buttigieg did.
  #155  
Old 02-10-2020, 03:40 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 19,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
Buttigieg knew EXACTLY what Medicare For All was when he answered that question. Sanders had been advocating for it for 3 years at that point. Warren was asked about it when she entered the race - before Buttigieg did.
You mean that one goofy tweet a year before his campaign started? Is this really the entirety of his "flip flop"?
  #156  
Old 02-10-2020, 03:56 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
You mean that one goofy tweet a year before his campaign started? Is this really the entirety of his "flip flop"?
If I may pile on, yes, I've brought this up a few times, and have done a somewhat cursory Google search to see if there is anything else to support that he was ever unequivocally for MFA. I haven't found anything as of yet.

ETA: Every time I look again, I find the same thing about the tweet.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 02-10-2020 at 03:59 PM.
  #157  
Old 02-10-2020, 05:49 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Buttigieg was on MSNBC on Steve Rattner's show last February saying Medicare for All was a compromise position between the NHS and fully private healthcare. It's been mentioned quite a few times. And early in 2019 referred to the ACA as a conservative tweak to our healthcare system.

I admit this is a biased source, but it goes into times where Buttigieg has discussed M4A positively:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/20...king-tons-cash

Last edited by ISiddiqui; 02-10-2020 at 05:51 PM.
  #158  
Old 02-11-2020, 06:23 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
CarnalK
You mean that one goofy tweet a year before his campaign started? Is this really the entirety of his "flip flop"?
At what point do you think to yourself "Yeah, I think Buttigieg is bullshit" He's not popular at all with Black voters, reversed himself on medicare for all and regularly goes to Wine Caves to ask for handouts from billionaires and presumptively declares victory in Iowa despite Sanders winning 6000 more votes.

Quote:
DrDeth
More or less.

Yes, I know, the employer pays also. But you see- that has nothing whatsoever to do with what my personal tax burden would be.
Your healthcare isn't going to cost an extra $10,000 per annum, however if you're in the top 2% of the income bracket, I have absolutely no sympathy for you. Does noblesse oblige or social contract mean anything to you?
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #159  
Old 02-11-2020, 06:38 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
At what point do you think to yourself "Yeah, I think Buttigieg is bullshit" He's not popular at all with Black voters, reversed himself on medicare for all and regularly goes to Wine Caves to ask for handouts from billionaires and presumptively declares victory in Iowa despite Sanders winning 6000 more votes.


1. He might get more popular with Black voters, after they see him gaining traction. Like they did with Obama after he beat Hillary in Iowa.

2. He modified his position, rather than reversed it. "Medicare for all who want it" isn't the opposite of "medicare for all."

3. I'm not sure how often he goes to wine caves, and I really don't care. Sounds kinda nice.

4. Politicians ask for money. Wish it wasn't so, but I won't hold that against him.

5. He did win Iowa. Bernie claiming he won the popular vote is as gratifying as Hillary saying that about 2016.
  #160  
Old 02-11-2020, 07:12 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
...reversed himself on medicare for all...
Since I've brought up what I think is facetiousness on the part of that tweet and you haven't addressed it, I am just going to say it outright: Buttigieg never expressed a sincere desire to support a specific, detailed thing known as "Medicare for All", and thus has not "reversed himself" on it. Never happened.
  #161  
Old 02-11-2020, 09:44 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Since I've brought up what I think is facetiousness on the part of that tweet and you haven't addressed it, I am just going to say it outright: Buttigieg never expressed a sincere desire to support a specific, detailed thing known as "Medicare for All", and thus has not "reversed himself" on it. Never happened.
I guess you are just going to ignore the comments on Steve Ratner on MSNBC I mentioned. I didn't even know about that tweet until this thread, tbh.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
  #162  
Old 02-11-2020, 10:00 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
I guess you are just going to ignore the comments on Steve Ratner on MSNBC I mentioned. I didn't even know about that tweet until this thread, tbh.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
I was responding directly to Ryan_Liam and didn't ignore your post outright. It's just that nothing in what you wrote yourself in that post suggested Buttigieg reversed himself, so in all honesty, I didn't read your link. Sorry. So I read it and it talks about what Medicare for All meant at one time and how Buttigieg says it meant something else, and quite frankly I don't have the time to decipher/research it all. I can accept that it might indeed show that Pete did in fact support the exact MFA that he now doesn't support. Of course, then it brings up the tweet again suggesting that's what they article is basing it's assertion on...
  #163  
Old 02-11-2020, 10:07 PM
ISiddiqui is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Decatur, Georgia, USA
Posts: 6,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I was responding directly to Ryan_Liam and didn't ignore your post outright. It's just that nothing in what you wrote yourself in that post suggested Buttigieg reversed himself, so in all honesty, I didn't read your link. Sorry. So I read it and it talks about what Medicare for All meant at one time and how Buttigieg says it meant something else, and quite frankly I don't have the time to decipher/research it all. I can accept that it might indeed show that Pete did in fact support the exact MFA that he now doesn't support. Of course, then it brings up the tweet again suggesting that's what they article is basing it's assertion on...
There are literally multiple things it talks about including the tweet you are referring to (there is an additional tweet in the same convo as well) with links (they are on the dates). To turn it all back on the one tweet you are talking about, feels like gaslighting to me, tbh.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Last edited by ISiddiqui; 02-11-2020 at 10:10 PM.
  #164  
Old 02-12-2020, 01:50 PM
SuntanLotion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: mentor ohio
Posts: 295
Tucker says Pete is the second robot candidate, the first being Dukakis. Tucker's a real comedian.
__________________
I want to know what happened pre malone
  #165  
Old 02-12-2020, 02:11 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
....

Your healthcare isn't going to cost an extra $10,000 per annum, however if you're in the top 2% of the income bracket, I have absolutely no sympathy for you. Does noblesse oblige or social contract mean anything to you?
I am near the bottom, but according to experts, the average American's tax burden would increase by $10000 a year to pay for sanders unworkable, unpassable, unrealistic and lying plan.
  #166  
Old 02-12-2020, 02:39 PM
Jimmy Chitwood is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Since I've brought up what I think is facetiousness on the part of that tweet and you haven't addressed it, I am just going to say it outright: Buttigieg never expressed a sincere desire to support a specific, detailed thing known as "Medicare for All", and thus has not "reversed himself" on it. Never happened.
You are not representing his tweet accurately.

Here is the exchange:

Quote:
Originally Posted by The People's Summit
Now Politico calls @PeteButtigieg the "Dems' savior."

Not surprisingly neither support #MedicareForAll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
Buh? When/where have you ever heard me oppose Medicare for All?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The People's Summit
We never said that you opposed it, but where did you say that you support #SinglePayer, #MedicareForAll?

Not once have you tweeted support for MFA/SP or #HR676. We checked your handle & every possible hashtag or term. If we’re wrong please show us where you’ve mentioned support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
Dang! It's been less than 24 hours and I'm slightly busy. I've also been on the record on this one since 2004:
(Here, Pete links an article he wrote at Harvard, in which he says:

Quote:
On the positive side, the future is when we could find out what it is like to live without dependence on foreign oil, or any oil. We would get to live in a nation where youth are bound together by a national service program which does needed work, instills values, and makes college more affordable at the same time. We could finally see a single-payer health care system that closes the gap between the U.S. and other nations when it comes to medical treatment.
)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The People's Summit
No worries, we understand you're busy.

But you wrote that article 14 years ago as a student at Harvard. I don't think you were a politician 14 years ago.

Can you affirmatively say that we need #MedicareForAll now and that insurance does not belong in healthcare? #SinglePayer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
Gosh! Okay... I, Pete Buttigieg, politician, do henceforth and forthwith declare, most affirmatively and indubitably, unto the ages, that I do favor Medicare for All, as I do favor any measure that would help get all Americans covered. Now if you'll excuse me, potholes await.
So, to recap. He's accused of not supporting M4A. He responds personally to say, where have I ever opposed it? His interlocutor presses him on it and says you haven't said you support it. Can you say you support it?

Pete suggests that he's "on the record" as supporting it, and then tweets what you've called a facetious response where he says he "favors" it.

In that specific context, where he's specifically being pressed on not supporting Medicare for All, and where the distinction between "supporting" and "not opposing" is explicitly spelled out, when he responded in that way, you're saying that you don't think he meant it? And you think that is not an example of him being mendacious about his position on the issue?

When he said it, it's clear that it was taken as sincerely meant. It's clear that he was aware of that, given that he was defending himself from the criticism that the opposite was true, and the person he was talking to was mollified. It seems to me that if you think he left himself some wiggle room because of the gee-golly way he wrote that statement, that's even more dishonest than if he had just outright said one thing and then changed his position later.
  #167  
Old 02-12-2020, 03:58 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by ISiddiqui View Post
There are literally multiple things it talks about including the tweet you are referring to (there is an additional tweet in the same convo as well) with links (they are on the dates). To turn it all back on the one tweet you are talking about, feels like gaslighting to me, tbh.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
Fair enough, I can see how you might think that, but I don't "gaslight". This started when the only thing I had seen was the tweet. But when you linked to the above, I saw discussions about what MFA meant then, and what it means now, and which Pete was responding to, etc. I can't sort it all out (or don't have the time to), so as I said, you may be right.
  #168  
Old 02-12-2020, 04:12 PM
Lance Turbo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 4,590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
I can't sort it all out (or don't have the time to), so as I said, you may be right.
On brand.
  #169  
Old 02-12-2020, 04:32 PM
sweepkick is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 507
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
More or less.

Yes, I know, the employer pays also. But you see- that has nothing whatsoever to do with what my personal tax burden would be.

Ok, I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear on what *actual* healthcare costs are, not what someone who is gainfully employed is paying for their part. Because that's not the complete picture.

This is not the thread to get too deep into this, but to me the fact that we tie healthcare to employment is one of the bigger problems we have in terms of ensuring that *everyone* has access to affordable health care. That only serves to benefit the bottom line of private insurance companies, and perhaps keep costs down for employers and employees, though to what extent is questionable.

And just to add - no one is proposing that in an alternative system, your employer will be forbidden to kick in the same amount of dollars to cover what you would pay in taxes for healthcare. At least I haven't heard any proposals along that line.

Last edited by sweepkick; 02-12-2020 at 04:32 PM. Reason: missed a word
  #170  
Old 02-12-2020, 04:45 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Chitwood View Post
You are not representing his tweet accurately.
Here's how I see it:

The People's Summit says Pete hasn't supported MFA/SP or #HR676. He replies he has been on the record (years ago) about a single-payer system being implemented. Those aren't the same things. Then the People's Summit presses him to make a direct statement on Medicare for All. He complies. The point is, based on his phrasing (who says "do henceforth and forthwith declare, most affirmatively and indubitably, unto the ages...") if there isn't a certain amount of facetiousness to his remark? Yes, he is for the idea of getting everyone health care, and favors MFA and/or other measures. But to take this as an absolute support of something that we are now discussing two years after it happened, and make it a major campaign issue, to me is unfair. As they say, YMMV.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 02-12-2020 at 04:46 PM.
  #171  
Old 02-12-2020, 04:52 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
On brand.
Do you check my posts every now and again so you can reply to them with this? This is a serious question, because you posted the exact same thing a few weeks ago. I would welcome discussing whatever point it is you want to make, if you would just kindly make it.

Thanks!
  #172  
Old 02-12-2020, 05:16 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Here's how I see it:

The People's Summit says Pete hasn't supported MFA/SP or #HR676. He replies he has been on the record (years ago) about a single-payer system being implemented. Those aren't the same things. Then the People's Summit presses him to make a direct statement on Medicare for All. He complies. The point is, based on his phrasing (who says "do henceforth and forthwith declare, most affirmatively and indubitably, unto the ages...") if there isn't a certain amount of facetiousness to his remark? Yes, he is for the idea of getting everyone health care, and favors MFA and/or other measures. But to take this as an absolute support of something that we are now discussing two years after it happened, and make it a major campaign issue, to me is unfair. As they say, YMMV.
I would interpret the tone of the tweet to indicate that he has a sense of humor, a refreshing thing in a politician. But I certainly wouldn't interpret it to mean that he didn't mean what he was saying, and actually held the opposite view.

And though it's true the meaning of Medicare For All has become a bit vague, he was being asked specifically about HR 676, Bernie Sanders' bill to eliminate private health insurers, by a questioner who ended with the tag #singlepayer. Not much room for ambiguity there.

I suppose a generous interpretation would be that he's saying that if he were in Congress, he would have voted yes on 676, but that he doesn't feel it's the very best possible plan. But I don't think it's off the wall to call this a flip-flop.
  #173  
Old 02-12-2020, 06:41 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
I am near the bottom, but according to experts, the average American's tax burden would increase by $10000 a year to pay for sanders unworkable, unpassable, unrealistic and lying plan.
No it won't lol, not even I pay such a ridiculously large amount for health care.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #174  
Old 02-12-2020, 06:42 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Oh it's good to see Ratboy (Buttigieg) Get the same number of delegates for N.H even though he lost to Sanders.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #175  
Old 02-12-2020, 06:50 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
No it won't lol, not even I pay such a ridiculously large amount for health care.
We pay (as employers) significantly more than $10,000 per employee in Heath Insurance costs.
  #176  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:03 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
We pay (as employers) significantly more than $10,000 per employee in Heath Insurance costs.
So you should be the first to celebrate a reduction in paying for healthcare as an employer.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #177  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:03 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by sweepkick View Post
Ok, I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear on what *actual* healthcare costs are, not what someone who is gainfully employed is paying for their part. Because that's not the complete picture.
....

And just to add - no one is proposing that in an alternative system, your employer will be forbidden to kick in the same amount of dollars to cover what you would pay in taxes for healthcare. At least I haven't heard any proposals along that line.

Look, I like the idea of UHC and real medicare for all. Petes idea of medicare for any who wants it is great.

I dont like sanders plan as it is too drastic, too expensive, and I dont like the big fat lie.

Yeah, like that's gonna happen.
  #178  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:04 PM
PastTense is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 8,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigAppleBucky View Post
The GOP campaign against Buttigieg is easy to predict. They'll dredge up a group of aggrieved folks from South Bend (there are bound to be some) and get them to say Mayor Pete is the worst thing since the Black Death. So simple for them.
You have a higher opinion of Republicans than I do. My guess is the major part of the campaign will be on social media and that it will be that he is a pervert--and of course you know about perverts and innocent kids!
  #179  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:04 PM
DrDeth is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 43,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
No it won't lol, not even I pay such a ridiculously large amount for health care.
Who said you did? But that's what the experts say it will cost the average taxpayer.
  #180  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:08 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Who said you did? But that's what the experts say it will cost the average taxpayer.
No it won't, it's ludicrous scaremongering.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #181  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:21 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
I would interpret the tone of the tweet to indicate that he has a sense of humor, a refreshing thing in a politician. But I certainly wouldn't interpret it to mean that he didn't mean what he was saying, and actually held the opposite view.

And though it's true the meaning of Medicare For All has become a bit vague, he was being asked specifically about HR 676, Bernie Sanders' bill to eliminate private health insurers, by a questioner who ended with the tag #singlepayer. Not much room for ambiguity there.

I suppose a generous interpretation would be that he's saying that if he were in Congress, he would have voted yes on 676, but that he doesn't feel it's the very best possible plan. But I don't think it's off the wall to call this a flip-flop.
What I would point to again though is that he said he was for MFA or any measure that would get all Americans covered, and also that he earlier gave a response about single-payer that he wrote about at Harvard. To me, a flip-flop is a reversal of a previously stated, well-defined position. I did not have to be MFA. But then that's just my definition of the term. By yours, ok, I can buy that. He flip-flopped. But to my mind there is no reason to take this as good evidence that he will just flip-flop away at will in the future. Not that it was you who suggested this, but others. IOW, it's nothing to get all worked up about. Ideas/positions/beliefs change over time.
  #182  
Old 02-12-2020, 07:34 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_Liam View Post
So you should be the first to celebrate a reduction in paying for healthcare as an employer.
Indeed I would. Any plan to lower costs or shift to a government based plan has my complete support. Hell, we could pay an extra $10,000 in taxes per employee to fund the thing and still come out ahead.

I'll never understand why big corporations aren't demanding single payer, UHC, or whatever you want to call it.
  #183  
Old 02-12-2020, 08:01 PM
Ryan_Liam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 4,291
Quote:
Procrustus
Indeed I would. Any plan to lower costs or shift to a government based plan has my complete support. Hell, we could pay an extra $10,000 in taxes per employee to fund the thing and still come out ahead.

I'll never understand why big corporations aren't demanding single payer, UHC, or whatever you want to call it.
You had me worried there, yes I agree with everything you've just said, especially the latter part, it's crazy.
__________________
If you can read this signature, you've scrubbed too hard.
  #184  
Old 02-12-2020, 10:51 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 16,585
An Army officer recently criticized Buttigieg for keeping track of statistics like "there were 119 times when I was guarding or with a vehicle in Afghanistan" as if being with a ground vehicle is equivalent to a pilot sortie in an aircraft.

Last edited by Velocity; 02-12-2020 at 10:51 PM.
  #185  
Old 02-13-2020, 11:00 AM
DrCube is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Caseyville, IL
Posts: 7,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I'll never understand why big corporations aren't demanding single payer, UHC, or whatever you want to call it.
Because it makes your employees captives. They can't quit for poor treatment or bad working conditions (or to go back to school or start their own business) because they'll lose their healthcare otherwise. That benefit makes up for the cost of employee funded healthcare.
  #186  
Old 02-13-2020, 11:03 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 4,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
An Army officer recently criticized Buttigieg for keeping track of statistics like "there were 119 times when I was guarding or with a vehicle in Afghanistan" as if being with a ground vehicle is equivalent to a pilot sortie in an aircraft.
Ouch. Not a good move by Buttigieg. I'm of the opinion that if you don't have a Purple Heart or, say, a combat medal of some sort, the less you say about your military service the better. Let it be known that you signed up during a war, that your opponents did not, and be done with it. Any more, and it only invites people to look up exactly what you did while serving. Instead, count on the laziness of the public not too look to deeply.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 02-13-2020 at 11:04 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 10:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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