Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats

GasBandit

Staff member
@Eriol

Hamlet, Act 4, Scene 7

When down her weedy trophies and herself
Fell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide,
And, mermaid-like awhile they bore her up,
Which time she chanted snatches of old lauds,
As one incapable of her own distress
Or like a creature native and endued
Unto that element. But long it could not be
Till that her garments, heavy with their drink,
Pull'd the poor wretch from her melodious lay
To muddy death.
 
The thing about "depending" on the ACA is it supports those who need it the same way Ophelia's dress kept her afloat.
@Eriol

Hamlet, Act 4, Scene 7

When down her weedy trophies and herself
Fell in the weeping brook. Her clothes spread wide,
And, mermaid-like awhile they bore her up,
Which time she chanted snatches of old lauds,
As one incapable of her own distress
Or like a creature native and endued
Unto that element. But long it could not be
Till that her garments, heavy with their drink,
Pull'd the poor wretch from her melodious lay
To muddy death.
OK, your point (I think) is that while it sustains people for a while, ultimately it will kill them? That's what I see in the analogy you're making.

The problem is that they are dead (or at least not working, destitute, homeless, etc) without it since they can't get medical care. Try working with debilitating pain, disease, etc. And you can't get coverage anymore because for any chronic condition you can't get covered for a pre-existing condition. And these are people not statistics. Thus just leaving them doesn't help at all. Something must be done. This might not be the right thing, but it's better than nothing.


I actually agree with your analysis stated here many times that the purpose of the law was to fail and then to bring in something more government-administered, like single-payer, if not single-deliverer (which btw, the 2nd half of that is bad, just see Canada). But the USA already has the highest per-capita spending on health care without universal coverage. And that means many many being in really bad shape. Another solution is needed I agree, but scrapping (without replacement) what's there is even scarier IMO.

To put it another way, it really doesn't matter how somebody got into a financially and medically terrible situation (bad decisions are always possible), but now that they're there, leaving no method of getting out of the situation dooms them forever.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
OK, your point (I think) is that while it sustains people for a while, ultimately it will kill them? That's what I see in the analogy you're making.
The ACA is paid for by a double dipping shell game. Its first 6 years of benefits are supposed to be paid for by its first 10 years of cash, and they count money taken from Medicaid while simultaneously not taking that money from medicaid. Insurance companies have steadily been leaving the exchanges. Obamacare, (AKA ACA) is insolvent, and will eventually collapse upon itself. It was designed that way on purpose, so that when it does, the Democrats can say "Welp, we gave the private sector one last ol' college try at fixing it, but shucky darn, I guess capitalism can't actually fix anything. Time to go full-on single payer!"

Which is what you said you just understood, yeah.

So the analogy is, it will keep them afloat until it collapses, at which point they will be dragged down to muddy death.
 
So the analogy is, it will keep them afloat until it collapses, at which point they will be dragged down to muddy death.
Your country? The problem is that I am primarily applying it to individuals. That's who needs the help, and thus any solution needs to be framed that way as well.

Also, I will admit I don't see the massive issue with Single-payer like you do. Single-VENDOR has all the horrors you see in Canada, but many many places have single-payer, and they're usually paying a lot less for health-care than the USA is, for at least as good (if not better) results.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Your country? The problem is that I am primarily applying it to individuals. That's who needs the help, and thus any solution needs to be framed that way as well.

Also, I will admit I don't see the massive issue with Single-payer like you do. Single-VENDOR has all the horrors you see in Canada, but many many places have single-payer, and they're usually paying a lot less for health-care than the USA is, for at least as good (if not better) results.
The move to single payer won't be seamless. ACA has to collapse first. There has to be an outcry. People have to be in pain, panicked, demanding action, so that political opponents can be shouted down as heartless and evil.
 
I am so excited to have an anti science President. I can't wait to eradicate diseases in the third world just to have them pop back up here.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who published a controversial book about the preservatives in vaccines being dangerous for children, will chair a commission on vaccine safety.

Blah blah buzzfeed yada yada.

These is a horse that we've been beating for 20 years. Even my mom started thinking that my son got autism from the MMR, which he didn't get until after we noticed something was wrong, but my mom writes her own revisionist history to fit what she hears. But even then, she believes even if it did, it's better than all of the diseases we vaccinate against.

I am so sad that science is becoming the enemy to so much of Republican America. I'm glad to see some Republican politicians are starting to speak out about what their party is becoming, but it's not enough. :/
 

So I'm reading on twitter that according to this article (that I didn't read) Trump was actually compromised by the russians (who have the ability to blackmail him or something?). Do I have the gist of the story right?
 

So I'm reading on twitter that according to this article (that I didn't read) Trump was actually compromised by the russians (who have the ability to blackmail him or something?). Do I have the gist of the story right?
Not exactly-


"
These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN.
The two-page synopsis also included allegations that there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government, according to two national security officials."

They are still in the process of vetting, though.
 

GasBandit

Staff member

So I'm reading on twitter that according to this article (that I didn't read) Trump was actually compromised by the russians (who have the ability to blackmail him or something?). Do I have the gist of the story right?
The article says that Russian operatives are claiming to have compromising personal and financial information about Trump. Not known what, if anything, they are going to/threatening to do with it. Might be they want to blackmail Trump, might be they just found it and sat on it so as to not hurt his presidential campaign.
 
The article says that Russian operatives are claiming to have compromising personal and financial information about Trump. Not known what, if anything, they are going to/threatening to do with it. Might be they want to blackmail Trump, might be they just found it and sat on it so as to not hurt his presidential campaign.
Plus, the information on this was compiled by a former MI6 agent who had provided credible information in the past.
 
That would have been quite the story, except for the fact is that it is utter bullshit. I swear, left wing America has such a raging hard on for Trump, it's becoming difficult to tell whether they're critics or fans of his.
 
Top