Prozac
-
Posts
1,714 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
37
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Blogs
Downloads
Wiki
Everything posted by Prozac
-
Substitute ‘for profit insurance company’ for ‘socialized medicine board’ in your example. I’m not sure which one’s better but I at least theoretically get a vote with one of those examples.
-
I might be completely wrong here, but my sense is they’re being sarcastic. The “That stuff ain’t happening with Kamala Biden” remark seemed particularly tongue in cheek.
-
The Interstate highway system is an excellent example. No where in the constitution does it say Americans are entitled to a safe and efficient nationwide transportation system. In fact, the founders could not possibly have predicted that there would ever be a need for such a system. That’s kind of the point. As the nation developed industrially and technologically, we collectively decided that a national highway system would be beneficial to the country as a whole. Tax dollars paid for it, and surely there were naysayers who insisted they would never use it and asked why their hard earned dollars should go to such a system. It’s called living in a modern, civilized society. When the society as a whole decides that there is an indispensable need, everybody gets to pitch in a little whether they like it or not. There are any number of examples of federally funded projects not specified by the constitution. How about the national power grid? The CDC? NASA? Hell, even a standing army, which the founders were dead set against, became something which we eventually discovered was impossible to do without. The point is, when we as a society decide that the benefits of having something outweigh the costs, the collective wins out and there will always be certain individuals who disagree. That may sound like big bad socialism, but it’s nothing new. And it’s the process we’re going through right now regarding healthcare. The collective has decided that the benefit outweighs the cost. This is why the Republican mantra is “repeal and replace” vs just “repeal”. Because they know the tide has turned and the majority of the public wants their government involved in the solution. IMO the battle over whether there should be some sort of national healthcare system is over and the discussion should be about what we want that system to look like. I agree that the ACA has some serious flaws, so let’s fix them or come up with something better.
-
Um, so I suppose you think that mandatory car insurance is unconstitutional as well? Insurance 101: Everybody pays in, just in case & only a few will end up actually using the service. The idea behind mandating certain types of insurance (like car insurance), is that it doesn’t really work unless it’s universal. This holds true for healthcare. I might decide to save a few bucks and roll the dice with my health, but this makes it more expensive for everyone else and they’re still on the hook when/if I require emergency services that may have been unnecessary with preventative care. The argument is that a healthy population is good for the nation as a whole and it’s cheaper in the long run to do preventative maintenance than to try to fix a catastrophic breakdown.
-
How do you separate the insurance aspect from healthcare? I’m not sure there’s a conversation to be had about the”best healthcare system in the world” without considering insurance in the equation. As far as “healthcare is not a right”, it’s abundantly clear that the majority of Americans would like it to be. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/03/most-continue-to-say-ensuring-health-care-coverage-is-governments-responsibility/
-
Tax/Spending reform would be awesome to see. I’m a pretty liberal guy socially, but I would be intrigued by a serious fiscal reform plan. Unfortunately, neither party is serious about this. You could argue that the tea party movement came close, but they never had a fiscal reform plan other than “not a single tax penny more”. There was never a serious effort to close tax loopholes or cut wasteful spending. The willingness to support all things Trump just further proves that to the modern Republican Party, fiscal reform is little more than a talking point to appease voters. At least the Dems are true to their “tax and spend” motto.
-
This is an important difference between the D’s and R’s right now. Dems know better than to nominate a candidate who is far outside the mainstream. Republicans, meanwhile, are clamoring to board the crazy train and leave their party’s traditional values behind. And I’ve got to agree with Drewpy here. While Joe and Kamala certainly espouse liberal values, they are both well within the mainstream. The idea that they are radical socialists (or controlled by radical elements) is simply untrue and is an obvious conservative trope attempting to scare people away.
-
‘80s. And because Johnny knows that Lou Gossett JR is the only place you ever need to turn for inspiration.
-
Yeah, very confidence inspiring...
-
Or.....you go with the simple answer: Media outlets of all stripes air the stories that draw more viewers, and there is a LOT of money in that. https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/355372/cable-tv-news-networks-grow-31-in-prime-time-ad-r.html
-
I just feel bad for anyone who tuned in thinking they might learn something about either candidate’s views or policies. Wallace lost control early and Biden wasn’t exactly amazing but my nine year old is capable of interrupting less than, and having a more mature conversation than Donald Trump. Trevor Noah suggested we give the next moderator a spray bottle.
-
In response to Lloyd: I said all of the upcoming stories about Trump will be factual. A better way of putting that is that they will be based in fact. The Biden camp will certainly embellish the stories and the media (except Fox) won’t push back very hard. Being able to use the media to your advantage and push your narrative has been a key campaign skill for a long time now. I think Trump has committed an unforced error here strictly in terms of campaign tactics. As far as his base having only grown, I’ve got to disagree with you on that one. He did well with college educated whites in 2016. Signs in 2020 point to him losing much of that demographic, especially women. In 2016 there was a huge contingent of voters who didn’t want to vote for Trump, but weren’t about to vote for Hillary. That group either held their noses and voted Trump, or didn’t vote at all. Biden doesn’t carry the baggage or stigma that Hillary did. Trump supporters are surely a vocal and visible bunch, but are certainly not a “silent majority”(especially the silent part). My guess is that we’ll see an even larger popular vote lead for Biden than we did for Clinton. The electoral college fight will be much closer and there are an awful lot of disturbing ways being discussed that Republicans could manipulate that body (to be even more) in Trump’s favor.
-
I’m sure there’ll be a bunch more stories in the coming weeks. Very few Trump supporters’ minds will be changed, and there aren’t many swing voters at the moment. That’s not who these stories are designed for. Like the Trump campaign, the Biden campaign understands that voter turnout will decide this election. These stories are designed to energize the base and keep them engaged until November third. I believe the Biden campaign is doing this better than Trump’s for now. It seems to me that the Biden strategy will be to suffocate any messaging coming out of Trump’s campaign with story after story. All of them will be factual so Trump will struggle to effectively counter. Biden has the advantage because most of the media will play along with him. This is what I have never understood about Trump’s media strategy. He’s painted the “mainstream media” as the enemy since day one. That may play well with his base, but he’s basically given every outlet but Fox News and OAN (if you call that an outlet) to his opponent.
-
I don’t think it helps that the cause is labeled “Defund the Police”. We should say “Reform the Police”, or “Reallocate Some Police Funding to Mental Health”. But those just don’t have the same ring. It’s hard to blame conservatives for misinterpretation of your position when your slogan is deliberately misleading. It’s yet another example of how we can talk past/over one another without seeing that we agree on more than we realize. “Institutional Racism” is another term that many of us seem to latch on to. I read Kiloalpha’s and Lord Ratner’s posts above and realize that they are cognizant of many issues that I would label institutional racism, but that they choose not to use that label. Buzzwords and catchy phrases look great on memes and banners, but have no place in a serious conversation about issues.
-
Thanks for posting this man. You reminded me that this has been on my watch list since it came out so I took the time to sit down and watch yesterday. I notice there are a couple downvotes on your post from people who likely haven’t watched it or even know what it’s about. For those who don’t want to click on links, what Sua posted was a link to the Netflix doc The Social Dilemma. It looks at how the business model of social networks, and to a lesser extent, cable news, can have unintended consequences when applied on the scale of basically the entire general public. The film takes an intentionally nonpartisan tack and the pitfalls it attempts to reveal can be equally applied to Republican/Democrat/Right/Left. Should be required viewing for anyone with an internet connection.
-
One thing we know for sure is that the Russians and other actors such as China, Iran, and North Korea have a vested interest in fomenting division and unrest in the United States. They used social media to great effect in the 2016 election to do just that and it appears that they are having even greater success this year. I’ve been vocal on which side I believe they’ve actively helped along, but I don’t think you have to take a partisan angle to realize that Americans of all ilks are being manipulated here. We’re all ready to be outraged at the “other side” and a few we’ll placed memes or bots are all it currently takes to fracture us. This is probably our greatest weakness as a nation right now and no one, not the politicians, not the media, not your liberal/conservative friends on Facebook, no one seems to be really taking the threat seriously. We have differences, some serious, but we should recognize that those differences are currently being exploited by outside actors, determined to bring the United States down to their own level. We the people need to get savvy to this threat and ask ourselves as we engage with one another whether our rhetoric and our tone are helping to advance outside interests. Not saying we all have to agree on everything and sing kumbaya in a drum circle in the forest, but we have got to wrap our heads around the fact that Blue America and Red America will fail on their own and that the only way forward is, as it’s always been, the United States of America.
-
I believe the feeling is mutual on the other side. So the question becomes: How do we bring politics back to something approximating the center in this country? I’m not sure as many political issues seem nearly insurmountable at present. Term limits and campaign finance reform would be a start, but those issues are a third rail for career politicians with too much to loose. I think the fact that you make the distinction between political actors and normal everyday folk is an important step that many, many keyboard warriors should consider.
-
lol
-
I think there is definitely room for the pax guys to grab more cargo if they can find a way to fit it on the planes, at least for the long haul stuff. We are leaving dozens of cans in HKG every day and now flights are canceling due to aircraft and crew availability. We’re constantly leaving Asia stuffed to the gills. I haven’t left SZX, HKG, or ICN under 980K in months. From what I understand the freight costs are going through the roof. I would imagine you could fill the belly of a 777 or 787 out of Asia pretty easily right now.
-
BTW, I agree with Graham’s assessment of changes made by Democrats regarding approval of appellate judges in the last half of the video above. Both parties have a recent history of changing rules that is troubling. However, denying a Democratic administration’s nomination nearly a year out from an election and making an about face when your party is in power is absolutely brazen hypocrisy. McConnell is making up rules as he goes. Republicans will say that it’s great for them, but what about the rest of the country? What do you think will happen when people come to terms with the fact that the presidential election is consistently skewed to the Republicans, that Republican congressional seats have been made artificially safe by gerrymandering, that Republicans have implemented rules in many state legislatures that make passing Democratic legislation nearly impossible, even when they hold the majority? Changing the rules and wryly manipulating the system for your own gains is all well and good, but if you are isolating and alienating the majority of the electorate in the process, you are actively harming the nation.
-
-
Awful lot of time with everybody in the pits. Also, how the hell do the backmarkers so royally fuck up a rolling re-start?
-
Another “not a movie” and a bit dated but I just started Cobra Kai on Netflix and it’s excellent. Custom designed for men of a certain age. There’s even a hilarious Iron Eagle reference early in season one. Definitely worth a watch if you haven’t discovered it yet.
-
As much as I’d like to see Rossi driving for an American team, I think you’re right. He’s likely not interested in a mid-tier team with limited podium opportunities. It’s going to be interesting to see how F1 positions itself to remain relevant in the coming years. I wouldn’t be surprised if FormulaE eventually surpasses it in popularity. I have to say I was initially skeptical, but the FormulaE format has become fairly compelling over the last couple years. What I’d really like to see is F1 come up with a far less restrictive rules package. Maybe say teams are limited to a 1.5 liter naturally aspirated power unit and anything else goes. Closed cockpits, active aero, shrouded wheels, etc. Other options to keep the speeds out of the stratosphere could be an outright HP limit or even a fuel limit. Can you get around Spa for 30 laps on say 30 gallons of fuel faster than your competitors? I think F1 is truly missing the mark when it comes to spurring innovation and providing an entertaining experience for fans. Much more imagination is needed.
