god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
yeah the problem isn't the mandate to me, it's just that the cushions they put in for people who will have genuine financial trouble with it are INCREDIBLY SPECIFIC AND POORLY THOUGHT OUT
Again I think any government program where a citizen wouldn't want a raise at work because they'd actually lose money should be rethought. It's double frustrating because the opposition party, if they lived in our reality, would fucking seize on this and FIX IT and take credit for the now MUCH LESS ONEROUS program
But no we got the well meaning but slightly disconnected bureaucrats and the guys that want to burn society down and create Galt's Gulch
we have the same problem with some forms of social assistance like disability and food stamps, where you are allowed to work up to a certain point, but if you work more than that, you're cut off your aid completely, so there's no incentive to work if you are capable
Both disability and food stamps have a sliding scale where you lose benefits as you earn money, it's not literally "$200 a month benefits at $10,000 income, $0 at $10,001", that's how the ACA's workplace exemptions work
If the cheapest workplace plan here didn't exist, I would get ~$1500 a year in subsidies and access to a marketplace plan for $175 or so a month that's as good as my "premium" workplace insurance
So the DS "touching is good" hand promotion thing is apparently going for like 200 on ebay?
I should wash mine, it's kinda dusty and gross looking. I've been using it as a fun game in school where I hide it and kids have to notice it is gone and figure out where it went.
Which is not something I should do anymore if this thing is worth 200 bucks.
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
Yes, but a mandate paired with weak price controls and weak quality controls is basically just a license to mug
I think it just gets back to for-profit health insurance being a fundamentally bad idea with broken incentives
kedinik on
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
We have it for Stormont, and so far it's been pretty reliable in vote share. The dumb people in charge are there because people voted for them, which is lame but honest.
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
For the system to work you need to have a way for healthy people to be forced to buy insurance before they get sick in order subsidize those who are not healthy to maintain the insurance system. This is an underlying basis of all insurance. You cannot buy insurance when your house is on fire and not have it before hand.
The mandate's existence allows for the ban on pre-existing conditions and discriminatory practices against folks based on sex and previous health history. Without it insurance companies in order to continue to exist would have to go back to pre-Obamacare system of basically denying or pricing out coverage to those who need it most since those who don't don't opt in to help equalize the cost across the board.
Beyond the moralizing about a private insurance market and its problems the only way to make sure the country in general is covered and to reduce catastrophic cost and such is through forcing everyone into a market or making sure that those that opt out contribute and that money is redistributed to those in the market to make up for the loss of those previously uncovered buy needing care who are now receiving it.
The mandate must exist to maintain the system. And even then the mandate penalty has been delayed multiple times to reduce the burden. Top it off the Republicans/Blue dogs did lay some poison pills including removing some of the reimbursement to insurances who took a loss on Obamacare plans to keep them in the market and increasing competition.
It is not a talking point from lobbyist. It actually is an underpinning of full insurance coverage of a population with private insurance firms. And without it the whole system will collapse to something worse than we had before Obamacare.
In reality it is still cheaper to swap to a pure single payer system but that isn't happening any time soon and was not happening when Obamacare was written. This was a compromise to try and reduce the damage our healthcare system was causing to our population and the economy. It was a bandaid almost.
+3
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
yeah the problem isn't the mandate to me, it's just that the cushions they put in for people who will have genuine financial trouble with it are INCREDIBLY SPECIFIC AND POORLY THOUGHT OUT
Again I think any government program where a citizen wouldn't want a raise at work because they'd actually lose money should be rethought. It's double frustrating because the opposition party, if they lived in our reality, would fucking seize on this and FIX IT and take credit for the now MUCH LESS ONEROUS program
But no we got the well meaning but slightly disconnected bureaucrats and the guys that want to burn society down and create Galt's Gulch
we have the same problem with some forms of social assistance like disability and food stamps, where you are allowed to work up to a certain point, but if you work more than that, you're cut off your aid completely, so there's no incentive to work if you are capable
Both disability and food stamps have a sliding scale where you lose benefits as you earn money, it's not literally "$200 a month benefits at $10,000 income, $0 at $10,001", that's how the ACA's workplace exemptions work
maybe that's different from how it used to be or something
i've known people who begged not to be scheduled more than however many days a week because they'd lose their assistance
they could have been full of shit as well i guess
or not understood the system. we're good at making sure people who need it don't understand the system
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
I'd give my left nut to have a centrist who is an enemy of perfect.
I'm still uncomfortable with [chat] swooning over Trudeau and I'm going to be a Debbie Downer about it every time because he's actually my Prime Minister and I gotta deal with his shitty craven politics.
It really, really bothers me how much of a pass he gets from the media and the world at large because he's attractive and the bar is set so low by other countries' politicians like Trump and May.
He's a feckless and untrustworthy weasel
He promotes and backs shitty, Orwellian laws that damage freedom (Bill C51, C23) and is a huge coward on environmental issues (oil pipelines, oil-sands). He makes sweeping campaign promises like election reform (which he's backpedaled on) and legalised cannabis (which he's gone nowhere with and is next on the chopping block).
There are some of my own countrymen who go "yeah but he was better than Harper", SO WHAT, this is Canada we have more than two parties and you didn't have to choose based on who was slightly less shit.
God this is so gross.
I hate to be negative always but it's the same thing as when people fawn over Joe Biden or even Obama.
Neoliberalism isn't good just because it looks so relative to the goddamn Legion of Doom.
Trudeau could not pick anyone better than Trump to stand next to and look great
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as a funding source for public goods*
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as a funding source for public goods*
I'm cool with the mandate but just letting employers have 100% of the control and completely cutting employees out from benefits at arbitrary points of income, and not letting the employee take things into account like student loans or other bills you can't just not pay is the problem
And everyone pretending this is all on the GOP, it was like this in the initial version of the bill too, as far as I recall - the Dems are in favor of this[/quote]
I dunno what the hell is up with the quote tree here, this is my post:
One might argue that your healthcare is more important than student loans which can be deffered or put off or put into income based repayment and such. I think that's the reasoning at least. It's like housing>food>healthcare>everything else
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
your centrist is like our left
so, he is going to be beloved by our left pretty handily
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
Yes, but a mandate paired with weak price controls and weak quality controls is basically just a license to mug
I think it just gets back to for-profit health insurance being a fundamentally bad idea with broken incentives
well, yeah, the mandate is a not great way to work with a terrible system
but the existing system would be worse without the mandate
Trudeau sounds like Obama then? Is that an apt comparison?
I'm a bit hesitant to make that comparison, because Trudeau is actually an incredibly poor orator & couldn't provide nearly the same nucleus of a movement.
The Liberal party here has had nothing to offer other than, 'But the Tories are bad!' for most of their existence. They are socially progressive, but only to the extent that it allows them to point at the Tories and say that they are evil. When the Tories actually implement decent policy or make a good socially progressive shift, the Liberals actually attack them for it because, again, this is the sole trick in their playbook.
The Democrats, by contrast, actually have policy initiatives that they carry out in the U.S. Actual things they do to improve lives & make the country richer. Our Liberals just make token efforts and photograph themselves making said token efforts, which is why we're still tied to a dwindling exports-based economy and have a generally shitty GDP for what should be a premiere western power.
I think I would more compare the Liberals to the American Green Party in that it's all talk, no substance.
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
Yes, but a mandate paired with weak price controls and weak quality controls is basically just a license to mug
I think it just gets back to for-profit health insurance being a fundamentally bad idea with broken incentives
well, yeah, the mandate is a not great way to work with a terrible system
but the existing system would be worse without the mandate
More to the point, left intact without the mandate the healthcare industry would collapse
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
I'd give my left nut to have a centrist who is an enemy of perfect.
Yeah well, in Canada I don't have to settle.
I'm sorry things are like they are in the US. I genuinely am. I understand the "must be nice to have a genuine left wing" sentiment.
But it's really frustrating to see that sort of mentality infect my own countrymen, who are just happy Trudeau isn't Harper and I'm like
Jesus fuck you can do better, we are not our southern neighbors, not yet
+3
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
your centrist is like our left
so, he is going to be beloved by our left pretty handily
god damnit, I can't get the HMO through work because I live in a different state, the cheapest health insurance I can get is absolute fucking garbage, still costs $214 a month, and has a $3500 deductible
so under the ACA if I don't buy it I get a fine, because the dog shit is $12 under being 8% of my annual income, but I definitely won't be able to afford to use any of these except the most expensive one, which I can't really afford the monthly fee for, and is over 10% of my income and should qualify me for a subsidy - but won't because the dog shit exists
yeah the mandate sucks
just a real bad idea
No, the mandate was a fine idea, implemented terribly. Thanks GOP and Blue Dogs!
I'm pretty sure the very existence of the mandate is one of the bad ideas we can thank the Blue Dogs for?
*holds forth on personal views about the fundamentally rotten nature of insurance as the funding source for public goods*
i mean
it doesn't work well with the mandate and states refusing to expand medicaid
it doesn't work at all without the mandate
I mean, that last bit is the talking point industry lobbyists sold to politicians, but I don't think it's bearing out?
It seems more like the mandate sets the (high) price at which insurance companies can comfortably ream poors who don't quite qualify for any real assistance; charge them a little less than the massive tax hit they would take, offer a barely legal policy that is basically only useful if you need invasive surgery or chemo
I've been poor for the last 4 years in a state with expanded Medicare, and the only time the mandate didn't cause some kind of financial crisis for me is when I had cheap health insurance through a full-time job
there's no way a risk pool works where the only people paying in are those taking out more than they contribute
yeah the problem isn't the mandate to me, it's just that the cushions they put in for people who will have genuine financial trouble with it are INCREDIBLY SPECIFIC AND POORLY THOUGHT OUT
Again I think any government program where a citizen wouldn't want a raise at work because they'd actually lose money should be rethought. It's double frustrating because the opposition party, if they lived in our reality, would fucking seize on this and FIX IT and take credit for the now MUCH LESS ONEROUS program
But no we got the well meaning but slightly disconnected bureaucrats and the guys that want to burn society down and create Galt's Gulch
we have the same problem with some forms of social assistance like disability and food stamps, where you are allowed to work up to a certain point, but if you work more than that, you're cut off your aid completely, so there's no incentive to work if you are capable
Both disability and food stamps have a sliding scale where you lose benefits as you earn money, it's not literally "$200 a month benefits at $10,000 income, $0 at $10,001", that's how the ACA's workplace exemptions work
maybe that's different from how it used to be or something
i've known people who begged not to be scheduled more than however many days a week because they'd lose their assistance
they could have been full of shit as well i guess
or not understood the system. we're good at making sure people who need it don't understand the system
If that's the case, it's in a state where they just don't ramp down benefits as you make more money, WI and IL are the only food stamps systems I'm familiar with and with both of them you get around $6/month when you run up to the line where you stop getting benefits
For disabled people, it's like $1 in benefits lost for $2 in income
Depending on the disability, you also can get an exemption for first $X where they don't take shit away, like SSDI
override367 on
0
Options
BeNarwhalThe Work Left UnfinishedRegistered Userregular
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
I guess I go soft on Trudeau a) because of who his predecessor was, b) because of my actually useless premier, and c) because of who his dad was.
Plus I can work with Canada Centrist - Canada Centrist ain't bad at all.
I honestly didn't know Trudeau was not beloved. That is definitely not the narrative spun in the states
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
your centrist is like our left
so, he is going to be beloved by our left pretty handily
Nah.
Feels like it.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
But
'Actual Left.'
Really?
Yes really
Canada's Liberal Party are the Center. They are not the Left. The Actual Left is over there <- and occupied by the likes of the NDP and to a lesser extent the Green Party.
The word choice is intentional, because when talking to Americans, the terms Liberal and Left are considered synonymous. They're not, not here.
Pony on
+2
Options
ChelleYeahMrs. LudiousLiving it up in Cinderella's CastleRegistered Userregular
This is a shameful label to acquire in your line of study, I assume? :P
It betrayed a biased perspective that interferes with work. If you think like a human, you'll never be good at hypothesizing or predicting non human behavior, and you can miss important things.
+1
Options
OnTheLastCastlelet's keep it haimish for the peripateticRegistered Userregular
I'm still kind of mad about the restaurant last night. I don't normally feel this way. I will now enter complain mode.
It was not at all busy, they just had 1 person for the entire place. It took 40 mins to get our waters and my beer. Our food didn't come out like everyone else's and it was odd. The waitress basically like loudly shamed me about my food being spicy and demanded to bring a milder version while I was in the bathroom. I'd been eating a lot of my girlfriends since it's family style and mine was the messiest thing ever and hers was a bit less so and I was wearing a suit.
We got our check 2 hours later at the same time as a couple that had arrived at least an hour later.
Grumble.
0
Options
ChelleYeahMrs. LudiousLiving it up in Cinderella's CastleRegistered Userregular
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
But
'Actual Left.'
Really?
in countries where centre parties are a thing, saying "actual left" can be an absolutely valid correction
and I'm pretty sure the canadian liberal party is not on the left
Abdhyius on
+2
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I mean, I get risk pools and insurance and used to be a licensed insurance agent
Mainly what I learned is that insurance is often an extremely inefficient band-aid for social services that Republicans do not want to provide
Well, no, it's efficient as hell in allocating money.
I mean, that is the primary reason we have them, right? Rich people pay the politicians to let them do this so they can get richer because people end up dying or being bankrupt without it?
jungleroomx on
0
Options
amateurhourOne day I'll be professionalhourThe woods somewhere in TennesseeRegistered Userregular
I'm still kind of mad about the restaurant last night. I don't normally feel this way. I will now enter complain mode.
It was not at all busy, they just had 1 person for the entire place. It took 40 mins to get our waters and my beer. Our food didn't come out like everyone else's and it was odd. The waitress basically like loudly shamed me about my food being spicy and demanded to bring a milder version while I was in the bathroom. I'd been eating a lot of my girlfriends since it's family style and mine was the messiest thing ever and hers was a bit less so and I was wearing a suit.
We got our check 2 hours later at the same time as a couple that had arrived at least an hour later.
Grumble.
::looks at calendar, feels no sympathy for Castle::
are YOU on the beer list?
0
Options
ChelleYeahMrs. LudiousLiving it up in Cinderella's CastleRegistered Userregular
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
But
'Actual Left.'
Really?
There's "left" in as it refers to the very narrow debate permitted in western liberal-conservative politics, and then there's "left" as in anything from social democrats to communists or anarchists.
Nancy Pelosi represents the 'left' and to hear Fox News say it she's a dangerous radical, but when pressed on the concerns of young voters and asked whether the Democratic Party would move in a more progressive economic direction, she rushed to affirm "We're capitalists, and that's just the way it is".
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
Actual Left sounds a whole lot like a No True Scotsman. Not that your feelings aren't valid Pony, or that your criticism of Trudeau's supporters doesn't have legs.
But
'Actual Left.'
Really?
There's "left" in as it refers to the very narrow debate permitted in western liberal-conservative politics, and then there's "left" as in anything from social democrats to communists or anarchists.
Nancy Pelosi represents the 'left' and to hear Fox News say it she's a dangerous radical, but when pressed on the concerns of young voters and asked whether the Democratic Party would move in a more progressive economic direction, she rushed to affirm "We're capitalists, and that's just the way it is".
american liberal-conservative politics. Not western.
Posts
Both disability and food stamps have a sliding scale where you lose benefits as you earn money, it's not literally "$200 a month benefits at $10,000 income, $0 at $10,001", that's how the ACA's workplace exemptions work
If the cheapest workplace plan here didn't exist, I would get ~$1500 a year in subsidies and access to a marketplace plan for $175 or so a month that's as good as my "premium" workplace insurance
I should wash mine, it's kinda dusty and gross looking. I've been using it as a fun game in school where I hide it and kids have to notice it is gone and figure out where it went.
Which is not something I should do anymore if this thing is worth 200 bucks.
It's rull good. I like it a lot. I'm only at the mission in the warehouse on the docks (just finished).
I bought all 3 of them so I'm looking forward to finishing them by the time PoE 3.0 comes out and then disappearing forever.
Pertinent info: Pistol-totin' decker.
He's beloved by some. In a lot of ways he's like Obama; to some people he's like the fucking Second Coming, pinning all their progressive hopes on him to fix everything even though he's a centrist who won't actually do very much in the way of progressive policy.
For those of us on the Actual Left, we're like "don't believe his lies" and scowl hard at the rest of the world giving him a handy, especially on such hard hitting political analysis as "is pretty"
Yes, but a mandate paired with weak price controls and weak quality controls is basically just a license to mug
I think it just gets back to for-profit health insurance being a fundamentally bad idea with broken incentives
We have it for Stormont, and so far it's been pretty reliable in vote share. The dumb people in charge are there because people voted for them, which is lame but honest.
For the system to work you need to have a way for healthy people to be forced to buy insurance before they get sick in order subsidize those who are not healthy to maintain the insurance system. This is an underlying basis of all insurance. You cannot buy insurance when your house is on fire and not have it before hand.
The mandate's existence allows for the ban on pre-existing conditions and discriminatory practices against folks based on sex and previous health history. Without it insurance companies in order to continue to exist would have to go back to pre-Obamacare system of basically denying or pricing out coverage to those who need it most since those who don't don't opt in to help equalize the cost across the board.
Beyond the moralizing about a private insurance market and its problems the only way to make sure the country in general is covered and to reduce catastrophic cost and such is through forcing everyone into a market or making sure that those that opt out contribute and that money is redistributed to those in the market to make up for the loss of those previously uncovered buy needing care who are now receiving it.
The mandate must exist to maintain the system. And even then the mandate penalty has been delayed multiple times to reduce the burden. Top it off the Republicans/Blue dogs did lay some poison pills including removing some of the reimbursement to insurances who took a loss on Obamacare plans to keep them in the market and increasing competition.
It is not a talking point from lobbyist. It actually is an underpinning of full insurance coverage of a population with private insurance firms. And without it the whole system will collapse to something worse than we had before Obamacare.
In reality it is still cheaper to swap to a pure single payer system but that isn't happening any time soon and was not happening when Obamacare was written. This was a compromise to try and reduce the damage our healthcare system was causing to our population and the economy. It was a bandaid almost.
maybe that's different from how it used to be or something
i've known people who begged not to be scheduled more than however many days a week because they'd lose their assistance
they could have been full of shit as well i guess
or not understood the system. we're good at making sure people who need it don't understand the system
I'd give my left nut to have a centrist who is an enemy of perfect.
Trudeau could not pick anyone better than Trump to stand next to and look great
I'm cool with the mandate but just letting employers have 100% of the control and completely cutting employees out from benefits at arbitrary points of income, and not letting the employee take things into account like student loans or other bills you can't just not pay is the problem
And everyone pretending this is all on the GOP, it was like this in the initial version of the bill too, as far as I recall - the Dems are in favor of this[/quote]
I dunno what the hell is up with the quote tree here, this is my post:
One might argue that your healthcare is more important than student loans which can be deffered or put off or put into income based repayment and such. I think that's the reasoning at least. It's like housing>food>healthcare>everything else
your centrist is like our left
so, he is going to be beloved by our left pretty handily
well, yeah, the mandate is a not great way to work with a terrible system
but the existing system would be worse without the mandate
I'm a bit hesitant to make that comparison, because Trudeau is actually an incredibly poor orator & couldn't provide nearly the same nucleus of a movement.
The Liberal party here has had nothing to offer other than, 'But the Tories are bad!' for most of their existence. They are socially progressive, but only to the extent that it allows them to point at the Tories and say that they are evil. When the Tories actually implement decent policy or make a good socially progressive shift, the Liberals actually attack them for it because, again, this is the sole trick in their playbook.
The Democrats, by contrast, actually have policy initiatives that they carry out in the U.S. Actual things they do to improve lives & make the country richer. Our Liberals just make token efforts and photograph themselves making said token efforts, which is why we're still tied to a dwindling exports-based economy and have a generally shitty GDP for what should be a premiere western power.
I think I would more compare the Liberals to the American Green Party in that it's all talk, no substance.
But
'Actual Left.'
Really?
More to the point, left intact without the mandate the healthcare industry would collapse
Yeah well, in Canada I don't have to settle.
I'm sorry things are like they are in the US. I genuinely am. I understand the "must be nice to have a genuine left wing" sentiment.
But it's really frustrating to see that sort of mentality infect my own countrymen, who are just happy Trudeau isn't Harper and I'm like
Jesus fuck you can do better, we are not our southern neighbors, not yet
Nah.
If that's the case, it's in a state where they just don't ramp down benefits as you make more money, WI and IL are the only food stamps systems I'm familiar with and with both of them you get around $6/month when you run up to the line where you stop getting benefits
For disabled people, it's like $1 in benefits lost for $2 in income
Depending on the disability, you also can get an exemption for first $X where they don't take shit away, like SSDI
I guess I go soft on Trudeau a) because of who his predecessor was, b) because of my actually useless premier, and c) because of who his dad was.
Plus I can work with Canada Centrist - Canada Centrist ain't bad at all.
Feels like it.
Mainly what I learned is that insurance is often an extremely inefficient band-aid for social services that Republicans do not want to provide
Yes really
Canada's Liberal Party are the Center. They are not the Left. The Actual Left is over there <- and occupied by the likes of the NDP and to a lesser extent the Green Party.
The word choice is intentional, because when talking to Americans, the terms Liberal and Left are considered synonymous. They're not, not here.
well TOO BAD
this is my lower back. note the impressively large screws going in to my hip bones!
It betrayed a biased perspective that interferes with work. If you think like a human, you'll never be good at hypothesizing or predicting non human behavior, and you can miss important things.
It was not at all busy, they just had 1 person for the entire place. It took 40 mins to get our waters and my beer. Our food didn't come out like everyone else's and it was odd. The waitress basically like loudly shamed me about my food being spicy and demanded to bring a milder version while I was in the bathroom. I'd been eating a lot of my girlfriends since it's family style and mine was the messiest thing ever and hers was a bit less so and I was wearing a suit.
We got our check 2 hours later at the same time as a couple that had arrived at least an hour later.
Grumble.
in countries where centre parties are a thing, saying "actual left" can be an absolutely valid correction
and I'm pretty sure the canadian liberal party is not on the left
Chelle that is fucking metal
Well, no, it's efficient as hell in allocating money.
I mean, that is the primary reason we have them, right? Rich people pay the politicians to let them do this so they can get richer because people end up dying or being bankrupt without it?
::looks at calendar, feels no sympathy for Castle::
WE ARE BORG
There's "left" in as it refers to the very narrow debate permitted in western liberal-conservative politics, and then there's "left" as in anything from social democrats to communists or anarchists.
Nancy Pelosi represents the 'left' and to hear Fox News say it she's a dangerous radical, but when pressed on the concerns of young voters and asked whether the Democratic Party would move in a more progressive economic direction, she rushed to affirm "We're capitalists, and that's just the way it is".
Not gonna argue with that.
american liberal-conservative politics. Not western.