• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT1| From Russia with Love

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

soul creator

Member
Keep It Simple and Take Credit

Instead of making retirement benefits more generous, or college cheaper, or health care universal, we’ve created accounts upon accounts, each of which you have to have enough money to contribute to, remember to pay into, and jump through all sorts of other hoops to maintain.
Click to expand...

This shouldn’t even be a liberal-socialist divide, although it seems to have become one in recent years. When society decided citizens should be able to read, we didn’t provide tax credits for books, we created public libraries. When we decided peoples’ houses shouldn’t burn down, we didn’t provide savings accounts for private fire insurance, we hired firefighters and built fire stations. If the broad left takes power again, enough with too-clever-by-half social engineering. Help people and take credit.
Click to expand...

more (including pics) at the link.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Oblivion said:
Kellyanne looks like she hasn't slept in 6 months.

And holy shit, look at Tapper go. He's been a good interviewer for a while, but I don't think I've seen him with this level of disdain before. He's truly tired of Kellyanne's (and the Trump admin's) shit.
Click to expand...
cumcrsfxeaartt6.jpg
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
sphagnum said:
But that would mean (gasp) big government!
Click to expand...

That would also mean higher taxes on the middle class.

Universal benefits are more well-liked than means tests or other targeted benefits, but jesus christ they're expensive and most programs are not popular enough to get people on board with the idea with massive tax hikes.

Like, some programs in Europe are funded with a 19% or so sales tax... This would be extremely unpopular in America and not really election winning.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
That would also mean higher taxes on the middle class.

Universal benefits are more well-liked than means tests or other targeted benefits, but jesus christ they're expensive and most programs are not popular enough to get people on board with the idea with massive tax hikes.

Like, some programs in Europe are funded with a 19% or so sales tax... This would be extremely unpopular in America and not really election winning.
Click to expand...

Well of course they don't like it when there's been a decades long war on the concept and the Democrats just keep retreating. Also racism and classism tying into people's opposition to higher taxes.

But big simple obvious ideas are the ones that make for big simple obvious PR. Boring technocratic gobbledygook doesn't stand up to that.
 
O

Ogodei

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
That would also mean higher taxes on the middle class.

Universal benefits are more well-liked than means tests or other targeted benefits, but jesus christ they're expensive and most programs are not popular enough to get people on board with the idea with massive tax hikes.

Like, some programs in Europe are funded with a 19% or so sales tax... This would be extremely unpopular in America and not really election winning.
Click to expand...

You could start by targeting the programs to be "zero sum." Figure out what average out-of-pocket spending on healthcare is by corporations and families: tax "large businesses" equal to that amount, as well as a small tax on families. Say a middle-income family ($70,000/year household) spends 15% of their gross income on health care, so that family gets a gross income tax of 15% in exchange for universal health care. Wealthy people, who might spend less as a proportion, still get the 15% tax. People making less than the median get less tax, until you get to 400% above the federal poverty line.

This way, for the average family, you and your employer are spending exactly what they would have spent before, but without the hassle of paperwork.

It could be the same way for universal college. The tax hikes would only reflect what the average family spends (which, since a lot of people don't go to college at all, the average would mean more costs for some but less costs for others).
 
K

kirblar

Member
Yeah, being better on messaging for that stuff is something that's sorely needed.

On a slightly different tangent- Something that's coming into play now in the US that is different than what we're seeing in the UK- it's far more difficult for the GOP to touch the ACA in large part due to the private sector being ready to rip them a new one, while in the UK, the tories have gone to town on the NHS with nothing to push back against them.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
sphagnum said:
But that would mean (gasp) big government!
Click to expand...
Stuff like Obamacare is already attacked as big government. Might as well pass something the other half actually likes.

I think Obama believed good policy would just be naturally popular, but the effects of PPACA, Dodd-Frank etc. are either too nebulous or too complicated to easily explain. Obama left with good approval ratings but it did shit-all for the party, he was just a charismatic guy who presided over a recovery.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
Ogodei said:
You could start by targeting the programs to be "zero sum." Figure out what average out-of-pocket spending on healthcare is by corporations and families: tax "large businesses" equal to that amount, as well as a small tax on families. Say a middle-income family ($70,000/year household) spends 15% of their gross income on health care, so that family gets a gross income tax of 15% in exchange for universal health care. Wealthy people, who might spend less as a proportion, still get the 15% tax. People making less than the median get less tax, until you get to 400% above the federal poverty line.

This way, for the average family, you and your employer are spending exactly what they would have spent before, but without the hassle of paperwork.

It could be the same way for universal college. The tax hikes would only reflect what the average family spends (which, since a lot of people don't go to college at all, the average would mean more costs for some but less costs for others).
Click to expand...
If people below a certain threshold are priced out of the market, then their costs have to be covered by the people with more money. Unless you are expecting the consolidation of all insurers to reduce the cost of insurance by exactly that amount, which I doubt, there has to be a transfer payment which comes by way of increased taxes.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
Stuff like Obamacare is already attacked as big government. Might as well pass something the other half actually likes.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is basically my take on it and why I was ripping my hair out during Obama's first term. The enemy is going to attack you anyway, so turn it around on them and show them what the power of government actually is.
 
S

sangreal

Member
dodd-frank has good parts but its a case study against omnibus bills

how many people even know about some of the provisions like mandating that merchants be allowed to set minimum and maximum CC charges (unless govt business of course). Or the interchange fee caps that killed debit card rewards and brought back checking account fees. Things that had nothing to do with the mortgage (or any) crisis

and before anyone says that capping interchange fees would trickle down to prices, instead processors just charge the max for all transactions where they had variable fees before

I am a huge fan of the CFPB though, and I probably wouldn't have a job if banks didn't need to constantly change their systems to meet new regulations

anyways, I am getting off my point which was just that I agree bills should be easily explainable and tailored to a specific purpose
 
O

Ogodei

Member
Spoiled Milk said:
If people below a certain threshold are priced out of the market, then their costs have to be covered by the people with more money. Unless you are expecting the consolidation of all insurers to reduce the cost of insurance by exactly that amount, which I doubt, there has to be a transfer payment which comes by way of increased taxes.
Click to expand...

I mean just funding single payer by convincing middle-income people to pay what they pay now, but to the government, with the added efficiency of single payer selling the difference. Folks would jump in a heartbeat if there was an insurer out there who promised no deductible and no bullshit, all for the same premium you're paying now. What does it matter if that insurer is the government?
 
A

AntoneM

Member
sphagnum said:
Yes, this is basically my take on it and why I was ripping my hair out during Obama's first term. The enemy is going to attack you anyway, so turn it around on them and show them what the power of government actually is.
Click to expand...

So much this. The irony of Obama's inexperience was that he was less able to deal with the Republican party than he was with international threats. And, while he did his best with international threats I would only give him a solid Harvard* grade of B- (mainly for actually trying to get out of Iraq).

*A C at a public university.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
People may *think* that Obamacare is big government, but most people didn't have their taxes go up to pay for it.

People could have disliked it more if it had included a huge middle class tax hike to pay for it. They would have really felt that.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
Ogodei said:
I mean just funding single payer by convincing middle-income people to pay what they pay now, but to the government, with the added efficiency of single payer selling the difference. Folks would jump in a heartbeat if there was an insurer out there who promised no deductible and no bullshit, all for the same premium you're paying now. What does it matter if that insurer is the government?
Click to expand...


DEATH PANELS
 
K

kirblar

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
People may *think* that Obamacare is big government, but most people didn't have their taxes go up to pay for it.

People could have disliked it more if it had included a huge middle class tax hike to pay for it. They would have really felt that.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the costs of employer-based insurance are hidden on the employer side, while w/ Obamacare they're all passed on to the employee. So it's sticker shock.
 
A

AntoneM

Member
kirblar said:
They do when they lose their jobs, have a relative/friend go on it, peek at rates themselves, etc.
Click to expand...

Why would it be sticker shock to them though? They had insurance subsidized by their employer now they are unemployed and can get government subsidized insurance... unless they live in a place where the Supreme Court and Republicans fucked them. Then I feel sympathy because they should be getting insurance for cheap, but they aren't, due to Republican purity tests.
 
K

kirblar

Member
AntoneM said:
Why would it be sticker shock to them though? They had insurance subsidized by their employer now they are unemployed and can get government subsidized insurance... unless they live in a place where the Supreme Court and Republicans fucked them. Then I feel sympathy because they should be getting insurance for cheap, but they aren't, due to Republican purity tests.
Click to expand...
Because people are stupid/ignorant and don't realize just how much their true premiums are.
 
T

TiredofWinning

Member
Oh man did anyone see the American Experience on the Oklahoma City bombing tonight?

Holy shit these fascist groups are now the ideological base of the White House. Timothy McVeigh won.

He fucking won.
 
J

Joeytj

Banned
shadowsdarknes said:
So has Susan Sarandon commented on Trump's presidency so far?
Click to expand...

I dare not look for that answer...

I would much rather believe (ignorantly) that she's regretting her stupid hate for Hillary, but honestly, she's way too privileged to notice the worst of Trump until it's probably too late, and she'll just keep saying "well, we'll never know if HIllary truly wouldn't have been as bad".

But, no, I don't know if she's bothered to be bothered by Trump's presidency. She's probably thinking that things were just as bad before "but nobody noticed because of Obama's charisma", as if thousands of refugees and green card holders were being detained at airports and turned back all the time during the last 8 years (I'm well aware airports weren't exactly Muslim/brown people friendly before, but this is another level).

EDIT: The North Dakota Access Pipeline going forward might be the wake up call she needed, but whatever, I don't think she'll be there making human chains against its construction or anything.
 
A

Aaronology

Member
shadowsdarknes said:
So has Susan Sarandon commented on Trump's presidency so far?
Click to expand...
She's defended herself against mobs of people (notably Debra Messing) who've taken her to task for propagating "both sides" bullshit that helped Donald win. But it's not her fault Clinton loss, Susan says! Democrats simply should have picked a better candidate, and other such nonsense.

If you're wondering if she's expressed any sort of regret over her pre-election behavior, the answer is absolutely not. Ditto Colin "I didn't even vote lol" Kaepernick. And you know what they have in common? They're both rich enough to not feel any negative effect of this administration whatsoever. How brave they were.
 
K

kirblar

Member
Aaronology said:
She's defended herself against mobs of people (notably Debra Messing) who've taken her to task for propagating "both sides" bullshit that helped Donald win. But it's not her fault Clinton loss, Susan says! Democrats simply should have picked a better candidate, and other such nonsense.

If you're wondering if she's expressed any sort of regret over her pre-election behavior, the answer is absolutely not. Ditto Colin "I didn't even vote lol" Kaepernick. And you know what they have in common? They're both rich enough to not feel any negative effect of this administration whatsoever. How brave they were.
Click to expand...
Yup.

Kick a hornet's next then drive off in your car when people ask for you to hand them the bugspray.
 
A

AntoneM

Member
Aaronology said:
She's defended herself against mobs of people (notably Debra Messing) who've taken her to task for propagating "both sides" bullshit that helped Donald win. But it's not her fault Clinton loss, Susan says! Democrats simply should have picked a better candidate, and other such nonsense.

If you're wondering if she's expressed any sort of regret over her pre-election behavior, the answer is absolutely not. Ditto Colin "I didn't even vote lol" Kaepernick. And you know what they have in common? They're both rich enough to not feel any negative effect of this administration whatsoever. How brave they were.
Click to expand...

You're right. It's not the fault of people like her, solely. It's her fault, and the fault of Comey and Putin.
 
S

sphagnum

Banned
TiredofWinning said:
Oh man did anyone see the American Experience on the Oklahoma City bombing tonight?

Holy shit these fascist groups are now the ideological base of the White House. Timothy McVeigh won.

He fucking won.
Click to expand...

It's really bizarre and interesting how libertarians can morph into fascists.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
After Mad Dog convinced Trump to authorize a dumbfuck mission in Yemen by saying "Obama would never have the balls to do this," the mission was a disaster and now Yemen is not allowing us to do any more ground missions because of how many people we killed.

WASHINGTON — Angry at the civilian casualties incurred last month in the first commando raid authorized by President Trump, Yemen has withdrawn permission for the United States to run Special Operations ground missions against suspected terror groups in the country, according to American officials.

Grisly photographs of children apparently killed in the crossfire of a 50-minute firefight during the raid caused outrage in Yemen. A member of the Navy’s SEAL Team 6, Chief Petty Officer William Owens, was also killed in the operation.

While the White House continues to insist that the attack was a “success” — a characterization it repeated on Tuesday — the suspension of commando operations is a setback for Mr. Trump, who has made it clear he plans to take a far more aggressive approach against Islamic militants.

It also calls into question whether the Pentagon will receive permission from the president for far more autonomy in selecting and executing its counterterrorism missions in Yemen, which it sought, unsuccessfully, from President Barack Obama in the last months of his presidency.
Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/...nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

So, this is a terrible start for James Mattis and probably another step further to actual invasion of Yemen.
 
F

Frank the Great

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
After Mad Dog convinced Trump to authorize a dumbfuck mission in Yemen by saying "Obama would never have the balls to do this," the mission was a disaster and now Yemen is not allowing us to do any more ground missions because of how many people we killed.



https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/07/...nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share&_r=0

So, this is a terrible start for James Mattis and probably another step further to actual invasion of Yemen.
Click to expand...

If this shit happened under a Democratic president we would never hear the end of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Russia begins Invasion of Ukraine
News NSFW 639 640 641 642 643
32K
2M
EviLore replied
Kanye West Planning Russia Trip to Meet Putin and Perform Sunday Service, Says Advisor
21
2K
It's all in the wrist replied
NYTIMES - Report Points to Microwave ‘Attack’ as Likely Source of Mystery Illnesses That Hit Diplomats and Spies
News
7
2K
DisguiseArrsick replied
Gowdy: Trump advisers should consider quitting over Russia
0
624
Arkage replied
  • Locked
Trump "Owned by Russia for 30 years" says his "Art of Deal" Ghostwriter
2 3
131
10K
FStubbs replied
Top Bottom