Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
st0wandgrow said:
Why did Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken and others co sponsor it then? Does that reflect poorly on all of them too?
Click to expand...
I support it. Doesn't mean I like it. It's complicated. Do I support universal access to healthcare. Well, yes I do. What message should I give my congressmen? I said to them I supported it. I said that because I don't want them to back away from the issue. I don't know what those characters you listed said about it. The Senator from Oregon who cosponsored the bill said it had no chance of passing but it furthered the conversation.

I would rather the bill not have been entered because it's ridiculous. Then again, nobody asked me. So, I have the choice as to which side to be on and I choose to tell my congressmen that I support it. Which I do. Kinda.

This is where you call me a fence sitter. That's not true. I firmly am on the side of supporting the bill. But it's a really, really dumb bill. Supporting it is about as appealing to me as eating a cold bowl of oatmeal. I can do it and it won't hurt me but I'm not liking it.

The ones this reflects poorly on are the cheering Downy boys who talk as if this is some historic moment. LOL.
 
st0wandgrow

st0wandgrow

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I support it. Doesn't mean I like it. It's complicated. Do I support universal access to healthcare. Well, yes I do. What message should I give my congressmen? I said to them I supported it. I said that because I don't want them to back away from the issue. I don't know what those characters you listed said about it. The Senator from Oregon who cosponsored the bill said it had no chance of passing but it furthered the conversation.

I would rather the bill not have been entered because it's ridiculous. Then again, nobody asked me. So, I have the choice as to which side to be on and I choose to tell my congressmen that I support it. Which I do. Kinda.

This is where you call me a fence sitter. That's not true. I firmly am on the side of supporting the bill. But it's a really, really dumb bill. Supporting it is about as appealing to me as eating a cold bowl of oatmeal. I can do it and it won't hurt me but I'm not liking it.

The ones this reflects poorly on are the cheering Downy boys who talk as if this is some historic moment. LOL.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's historic. Who said that? I do think it was a good idea to introduce it now though considering how the topic of healthcare is front and center (even though it stood no chance of passing). Plus I appreciated seeing where certain Dems stand on the issue. Kamala Harris for example scored some points with me looking ahead to 2020....
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
I support it. Doesn't mean I like it. It's complicated. Do I support universal access to healthcare. Well, yes I do. What message should I give my congressmen? I said to them I supported it. I said that because I don't want them to back away from the issue. I don't know what those characters you listed said about it. The Senator from Oregon who cosponsored the bill said it had no chance of passing but it furthered the conversation.

I would rather the bill not have been entered because it's ridiculous. Then again, nobody asked me. So, I have the choice as to which side to be on and I choose to tell my congressmen that I support it. Which I do. Kinda.

This is where you call me a fence sitter. That's not true. I firmly am on the side of supporting the bill. But it's a really, really dumb bill. Supporting it is about as appealing to me as eating a cold bowl of oatmeal. I can do it and it won't hurt me but I'm not liking it.

The ones this reflects poorly on are the cheering Downy boys who talk as if this is some historic moment. LOL.
Click to expand...
Just introducing the bill when he did was an excellent tactical maneuver; it got everyone talking about HIS bill instead of the toilet paper the Republicans were trying to pass.

And it worked.

Complain some more.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Just introducing the bill when he did was an excellent tactical maneuver; it got everyone talking about HIS bill instead of the toilet paper the Republicans were trying to pass.

And it worked.

Complain some more.
Click to expand...
no, intense pressure on republicans it was got a few Rs to vote no, not any imaginary excitement over some symbolic legislation that stood no chance of passing.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Just introducing the bill when he did was an excellent tactical maneuver; it got everyone talking about HIS bill instead of the toilet paper the Republicans were trying to pass.

And it worked.

Complain some more.
Click to expand...
Distracting from the fact the Republican bill was a piece of shit is good strategy now?

The only reason the Republican bill didn't pass was because everyone was talking about it, not the "failed to even be discussed" Sanders proposed bill (I don't think you can even call it a bill if it wasnt presented for a vote...).

You're falling into the echo chamber again with false reinforcement of your beliefs.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Distracting from the fact the Republican bill was a piece of shit is good strategy now?

The only reason the Republican bill didn't pass was because everyone was talking about it, not the "failed to even be discussed" Sanders proposed bill (I don't think you can even call it a bill if it wasnt presented for a vote...).

You're falling into the echo chamber again with false reinforcement of your beliefs.
Click to expand...
If Sanders' bill was strictly symbolic, people like Booker and Gillibrand wouldn't have cosponsored it. Anyone who hopes to run for president as a Democrat in 2020 knows if they didn't, they wouldn't stand a chance
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
So you're saying it only got co-sponsors for political advantage?

Good job convincing us it wasn't a populist symbolic joke...
Click to expand...
They wouldn't stand a chance because the majority of Americans support universal healthcare..

The Democrats that don't are going to have a very tough time come reelection. In other words, the Democrats who've spent 80 years supporting universal healthcare without ever actually going on the record and casting a vote for it or sponsoring a bill just got held accountable. Go on the record and support it or kiss your seat goodbye.

So much for symbolism
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
They wouldn't stand a chance because the majority of Americans support universal healthcare..

The Democrats that don't are going to have a very tough time come reelection. In other words, the Democrats who've spent 80 years supporting universal healthcare without ever actually going on the record and casting a vote for it or sponsoring a bill just got held accountable. Go on the record and support it or kiss your seat goodbye.

So much for symbolism
Click to expand...
Delusional...

You say it so much you believe it, lol
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Single payer with privatized medical infrastructure and medicine would be an economic disaster. It would create hundreds of Martin Skreli types and systematic community health problems like diabetes would actually increase since they generate so much profit.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Single payer with privatized medical infrastructure and medicine would be an economic disaster. It would create hundreds of Martin Skreli types and systematic community health problems like diabetes would actually increase since they generate so much profit.
Click to expand...
I agree completely.

Some things just aren't amenable to a capitalist model and healthcare is one of them.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
I agree completely.

Some things just aren't amenable to a capitalist model and healthcare is one of them.
Click to expand...
Then why do you never stow your uninformed opinions about Bernard's terrible bill? You do realize that the rest of us are actually being kind to him by calling it symbolic, right? If he actually hopes to see that garbage passed he is even more crooked than I have been saying.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Then why do you never stow your uninformed opinions about Bernard's terrible bill? You do realize that the rest of us are actually being kind to him by calling it symbolic, right? If he actually hopes to see that garbage passed he is even more crooked than I have been saying.
Click to expand...
It's a long step in the right direction.

The current system is irredeemably corrupt and his proposals are a big improvement.

I won't go along with being the enemy of the vast improvement just because it isn't perfect.
 
Last edited:
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
It is not a vast improvement. It's a symbolic threat. Then he went on and on about the corporations that would oppose it. What a fucking windbag. It would be a massive gift for those corporations. It would break the budget and you literally just agreed that public health would worsen.

Pull your head out of Bernard's ass.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Credit where it's due; thanks for this, @Drowning-Man


After the Crash of 2008, Iceland put the bankers in prison, their economy turned around and the people thrived.

Why couldn't that happen in America? The answer is a study in everything that's gone wrong with our republic.

It's not like the Founding Fathers didn't try to warm us, either.

Nevermind FDR.
 
Drowning-Man

Drowning-Man

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Credit where it's due; thanks for this, @Drowning-Man


After the Crash of 2008, Iceland put the bankers in prison, their economy turned around and the people thrived.

Why couldn't that happen in America? The answer is a study in everything that's gone wrong with our republic.

It's not like the Founding Fathers didn't try to warm us, either.

Nevermind FDR.
Click to expand...
We've become to accustomed to our slavery unfortunately
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
TARP was bush. That was the bank bailout.

ARRA was obama, that was a bailout for homeowners, taxpayers, and the unemployed.

Get facts right, it helps.
Click to expand...
He should have jailed the bankers. It is a difficult thing to overlook. But at least they went after a small Chinese bank in NY. cough cough.

But Trump built his cabinet around them, so there's that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top