Author Topic: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?  (Read 382512 times)

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1764
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2350 on: February 25, 2017, 08:21:44 PM »
I don't see the democrats agreeing to such a plan because it would cut the profits of many of their corporate interests would not accept the cut in profits it would take to pay workers more.

What an illogical statement. It's Republicans and not the Democrats who try to protect corporate profits regardless of who is harmed in the process. You have it exactly backwards.
I think this was covered in the ACA thread; the reason we don't have single payer is that Democrats are beholden to their corporate interests, who would not wish to see their profits drop. It was not because the ACA was a better plan than single payer for the American people.

That's backwards thinking, every Republican Senator in the 2009 vote was against any kind of health care for all people. ACA was a compromise effort to extend healthcare to as many as possible, and overcome the filibuster efforts of the Republican Senators. There were at most 2 or 3 Senate Democrats/Independents that stood in the way of the public option within ACA.  All 40 Republican Senators back in 2009 stood in the way of anything happening at all.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2351 on: February 25, 2017, 09:11:44 PM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

Cressida

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2331
  • Location: Sunset Zone 5
  • gender is a hierarchy
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2352 on: February 25, 2017, 11:29:39 PM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

That's not accurate. They couldn't pass a public option because Ben Nelson refused to vote for one.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7193
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2353 on: February 25, 2017, 11:32:44 PM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

Where are you getting this version of history from?  Because that's not what happened.

You may recall that Democrats TRIED to pass single payer health care, back in the 90s, with Hillary Clinton.  Republicans tore it apart.  It has always been Republicans who opposed health care reform of any kind.  It has always been Republicans who solely support their corporate interests at the expense of the working class. 

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you blaming Democrats for everything.  This is classic Donald Trump behavior, and you should know better.  Are you a 70 year old fat man with a poor diet?  Attack your opponents health and stamina!  Were you born in to a wealthy family?  Campaign on behalf of blue collar workers!  Are you a five time draft dodger?  "No one is better on the military than me!"  Do you hate the American health care system?  Blame the Democrats!

It's disgusting and disingenuous and deceitful and dishonest and it discredits everything else you have to say.  Just stop it.

Democrats have been trying to fix health care since forever.  They passed medicare and medicaid.  They tried to pass single payer.  Due to Republican opposition, they had to settle for a neutered version of the ACA.  You're blaming the wrong party, plain and simple, and you do it SO consistently and SO blatantly dishonestly that I'm struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt (ignorance) instead of taking you at face value (malice).


Sydneystache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 274
  • Location: Sydney (Westie!)
  • Aiming for RE!
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2354 on: February 26, 2017, 01:57:20 AM »
Since the wannabe great dictator is missing the White House Correspondents' Dinner, anyone else wanting to see Alec Baldwin and Melissa McCarthy reprise their roles? That or a stand-in orange dummy.

I suppose Trumpie couldn't ban more than half of the guests at the dinner so might as well miss it.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3575
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2355 on: February 26, 2017, 03:30:24 AM »
Since the wannabe great dictator is missing the White House Correspondents' Dinner, anyone else wanting to see Alec Baldwin and Melissa McCarthy reprise their roles? That or a stand-in orange dummy.

I suppose Trumpie couldn't ban more than half of the guests at the dinner so might as well miss it.
Trump is a coward. But I think that's been known for a long time, right?

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2356 on: February 26, 2017, 03:37:09 AM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

Where are you getting this version of history from?  Because that's not what happened.

You may recall that Democrats TRIED to pass single payer health care, back in the 90s, with Hillary Clinton.  Republicans tore it apart.  It has always been Republicans who opposed health care reform of any kind.  It has always been Republicans who solely support their corporate interests at the expense of the working class. 

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you blaming Democrats for everything.  This is classic Donald Trump behavior, and you should know better.  Are you a 70 year old fat man with a poor diet?  Attack your opponents health and stamina!  Were you born in to a wealthy family?  Campaign on behalf of blue collar workers!  Are you a five time draft dodger?  "No one is better on the military than me!"  Do you hate the American health care system?  Blame the Democrats!

It's disgusting and disingenuous and deceitful and dishonest and it discredits everything else you have to say.  Just stop it.

Democrats have been trying to fix health care since forever.  They passed medicare and medicaid.  They tried to pass single payer.  Due to Republican opposition, they had to settle for a neutered version of the ACA.  You're blaming the wrong party, plain and simple, and you do it SO consistently and SO blatantly dishonestly that I'm struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt (ignorance) instead of taking you at face value (malice).
Calm down. No need for personal attacks because if a disagreement.

 Of course republicans refused health care reform. That's exactly the point, Democrats had all the votes for anything they could dream up, without any need for Republicans to support it. I'm sorry you're tired of me blaming democrats, when they stop screwing up as bad as the Republicans, I will dance in the street and be happy to give them credit. The fact that Republicans are terrible doesn't let Democrats off the hook for the mess we got instead.  Or are you suggesting the Republicans are to thank for the ACA, sinces it was originally their plan and they wouldn't have allowed anything else to go through? You can't say that Democrats passed the ACA against all Republican opposition, but were somehow stymied by those blasted Republicans when it came to single payer.  It is untrue, and completely partisian.

Now to say why would be a matter of debate.  In the ACA thread you clearly claimed the dems didn't pass single payer because of the insurance lobby. Now you say it was republicans, who all voted against the bill but still couldn't stop it, are still to blame?

Democrats may have been trying to fix health care forever. I'm sick and tired of them fucking it up and failing so god damned always. It's fine if you wish to blame the other party for their failings, but they had a super majority in congress and a progressive president and had their chance to truly improve health care in this country, despite any Republican disagreement . Instead they gave the insurance lobby huge subsidies, the people double digit premium increases and little improvement in Healthcare  outcomes for their trouble. Forgive me that I'm not cutting the corrupt bastards any slack.

Sydneystache

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 274
  • Location: Sydney (Westie!)
  • Aiming for RE!
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2357 on: February 26, 2017, 03:56:37 AM »
Since the wannabe great dictator is missing the White House Correspondents' Dinner, anyone else wanting to see Alec Baldwin and Melissa McCarthy reprise their roles? That or a stand-in orange dummy.

I suppose Trumpie couldn't ban more than half of the guests at the dinner so might as well miss it.
Trump is a coward. But I think that's been known for a long time, right?

Yes, he has many minions to act/cover/interpret for him...but WHO will turn up to the dinner as guest of (dis)honour?

Enquiring minds want to know :-)

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3575
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2358 on: February 26, 2017, 05:01:01 AM »
Democrats may have been trying to fix health care forever. I'm sick and tired of them fucking it up and failing so god damned always. It's fine if you wish to blame the other party for their failings, but they had a super majority in congress and a progressive president and had their chance to truly improve health care in this country, despite any Republican disagreement . Instead they gave the insurance lobby huge subsidies, the people double digit premium increases and little improvement in Healthcare  outcomes for their trouble. Forgive me that I'm not cutting the corrupt bastards any slack.
BIB: this is no doubt true for some but it is not true for all.  Can it be acknowledged that the ACA has disbenefits for some (usually those who already had good health, good health care and the money to pay for it) and benefits for others (usually those without good health, good health care or the money to pay for it)?  Saying that something is all bad just because it's not all good, or because it's not good for your particular demographic, doesn't take the discussion anywhere.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3298
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2359 on: February 26, 2017, 07:04:39 AM »
Since the wannabe great dictator is missing the White House Correspondents' Dinner, anyone else wanting to see Alec Baldwin and Melissa McCarthy reprise their roles? That or a stand-in orange dummy.

I suppose Trumpie couldn't ban more than half of the guests at the dinner so might as well miss it.
Trump is a coward. But I think that's been known for a long time, right?

Yes, he has many minions to act/cover/interpret for him...but WHO will turn up to the dinner as guest of (dis)honour?

Enquiring minds want to know :-)

I'm hoping they set up an empty chair and roast that, a la Clint Eastwood.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1764
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2360 on: February 26, 2017, 07:16:34 AM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

Where are you getting this version of history from?  Because that's not what happened.

You may recall that Democrats TRIED to pass single payer health care, back in the 90s, with Hillary Clinton.  Republicans tore it apart.  It has always been Republicans who opposed health care reform of any kind.  It has always been Republicans who solely support their corporate interests at the expense of the working class. 

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you blaming Democrats for everything.  This is classic Donald Trump behavior, and you should know better.  Are you a 70 year old fat man with a poor diet?  Attack your opponents health and stamina!  Were you born in to a wealthy family?  Campaign on behalf of blue collar workers!  Are you a five time draft dodger?  "No one is better on the military than me!"  Do you hate the American health care system?  Blame the Democrats!

It's disgusting and disingenuous and deceitful and dishonest and it discredits everything else you have to say.  Just stop it.

Democrats have been trying to fix health care since forever.  They passed medicare and medicaid.  They tried to pass single payer.  Due to Republican opposition, they had to settle for a neutered version of the ACA.  You're blaming the wrong party, plain and simple, and you do it SO consistently and SO blatantly dishonestly that I'm struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt (ignorance) instead of taking you at face value (malice).
Calm down. No need for personal attacks because if a disagreement.

 Of course republicans refused health care reform. That's exactly the point, Democrats had all the votes for anything they could dream up, without any need for Republicans to support it. I'm sorry you're tired of me blaming democrats, when they stop screwing up as bad as the Republicans, I will dance in the street and be happy to give them credit. The fact that Republicans are terrible doesn't let Democrats off the hook for the mess we got instead.  Or are you suggesting the Republicans are to thank for the ACA, sinces it was originally their plan and they wouldn't have allowed anything else to go through? You can't say that Democrats passed the ACA against all Republican opposition, but were somehow stymied by those blasted Republicans when it came to single payer.  It is untrue, and completely partisian.

Now to say why would be a matter of debate.  In the ACA thread you clearly claimed the dems didn't pass single payer because of the insurance lobby. Now you say it was republicans, who all voted against the bill but still couldn't stop it, are still to blame?

Democrats may have been trying to fix health care forever. I'm sick and tired of them fucking it up and failing so god damned always. It's fine if you wish to blame the other party for their failings, but they had a super majority in congress and a progressive president and had their chance to truly improve health care in this country, despite any Republican disagreement . Instead they gave the insurance lobby huge subsidies, the people double digit premium increases and little improvement in Healthcare  outcomes for their trouble. Forgive me that I'm not cutting the corrupt bastards any slack.

I'm going to quote Obama, who said don't let perfection be the enemy of good. You are stating that because everything isn't exactly perfect with ACA, it must be bad. I disagree and your thinking is really EXTREME, it's either a perfect health care solution or it's evil incarnate. Millions of people now have health insurance than before as a result of ACA. Yes a small portion of wealthier/healthier people who don't qualify for subsidies are worse off financially as a result, but the vast majority of people under ACA got subsidized care.

The solution is to expand those subsidies so there isn't such an extreme ending of subsidies at a certain MAGI point. GoCurryCracker has an excellent blog post on this subsidy / income comparison.
And the solution for Mustachians was to lower that MAGI if possible through 401K/tIRA/HSA to garner subsidies.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2361 on: February 26, 2017, 07:32:59 AM »

I'm going to quote Obama, who said don't let perfection be the enemy of good. ...

Just chiming in here to say that quote isn't attributable to Obama (though I believe he did use the phrase on several occasions).  Versions of it go back at least to the 17th century, and probably earlier. Citations matter.

FWIW, I still view the ACA overall as a sizable improvement over the system that existed circa 2007. Dems made some mistakes and Republicans slipped some poisoned pills into the bill.  Mostly it suffers from a now decade long attack campaign that has highlighted its faults, exaggerated (and sometimes completely lied about) its shortcomings, and has rarely been compared to what came before (i.e. practically never do we hear a discussion about 'this is where we are better of, nad this is where we have fallen short').\

It could either be tweaked periodically to be improved (though that's politically difficult for obvious reasons), or it could be used as a trail-run for a completely new and improved bill.  Unfortunatly we seem to be going down road #3... blow the whole damn thing up and learn nothing from it.

Working Mama

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2362 on: February 26, 2017, 07:47:59 AM »
Sadly my views are changing.  I am starting to see the DNC/RNC as similar shades of brown.

Jimmy Dore's Show on youtube is pretty enlightening.  He commented that when Americans are riled up to pick on people that are less fortunate/advantaged than them, such as immigrants or refugees; the idea is to distract them from the theft of tax payer dollars, policies that mess with us etc...

One example, that shocked me, was that it cost the US military just shy of $4mln to keep an American solider in Afghanistan for a year.  Here's the info from TIME: "the CRS report says the cost of keeping a single American soldier there this year is an eye-watering $3.9 million."  We are spending huge sums.  And now...
Trump's general in Afghanistan needs a few thousand more troops to break the stalemate with the Taliban.  So this has been going on a long time, ... a few a more troops is going to change things? They really know how stupid we really are, with thoroughly lame logic as that. Read for yourselves here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/us/politics/us-afghanistan-troops.html

So irrespective of party in power we are going to pour more money into a country, that we totally messed up in the 1980s, when we could have done things at least a little better.

Sigh...such a tremendously sad state of our country.


« Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 03:32:09 PM by Working Mama »

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2363 on: February 26, 2017, 12:06:21 PM »

One example, that shocked me, was that it cost the US military just shy of $4mln to keep an American solider in Afghanistan for a year.  Here's the info from TIME: "the CRS report says the cost of keeping a single American soldier there this year is an eye-watering $3.9 million."  We are spending huge sums.  And now...

I hate "facts" like these. They have a kernel of truth, but lack context and are designed to get people riled up one way or another.  As I understand this particular metric, you take the total amount the military spends in one area and divide by the total number of combat soldiers and ... voila, $4MM/soldier.  It's both shocking and not particularly helpful.  It ignores all the infrastructure, contractors, and military support (lots of aircraft), and it doesn't scale particularly well - i.e. if you double the number of combat soldiers you don't double the cost (because much of the 'support' is already there).

Yes, we are spending an almost ludicrous sum on our armed forces during a time when our country is, historically speaking, pretty safe from external threats. We spend more than any other coutnry, and more than the next 8 countries combined (most of which are our allies).

Quote
So irrespective of party in power we are going to pour more money info a country that we totally messed up in the 1980s, when we could have done things at least a little better.
[/quote]
To be fair the soviets kinda leveled Afghanistan - we just supported the counter-insurgency.  Part of the "American DNA" seems to be a steadfast belief that the world can be a better place, and we ought to be the ones actively making that change. It's not a bad instinct and much good has come from it, but it also gets us into military quagmires when we think that our intervention will suddenly create new strong democracies.

...and now Trump is so convinced of his own brilliance that he thinks he will usher in peace in the middle east after several millenia of ethnic wars. That's literally been the belief of the last 8+ administrations.

Malaysia41

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3198
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Verona, Italy
    • My mmm journal
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2364 on: February 26, 2017, 01:53:55 PM »
Sadly my views are changing.  I am starting to see the DNC/RNC as similar shades of brown.

Jimmy Dore's Show on youtube is pretty enlightening.  He commented that when Americans are riled up to pick on people that are less fortunate/advantaged than them, such as immigrants or refugees; the idea is to distract them from the theft of tax payer dollars, policies that mess with us etc...

One example, that shocked me, was that it cost the US military just shy of $4mln to keep an American solider in Afghanistan for a year.  Here's the info from TIME: "the CRS report says the cost of keeping a single American soldier there this year is an eye-watering $3.9 million."  We are spending huge sums.  And now...
Trump's general in Afghanistan needs a few thousand more troops to break the stalemate with the Taliban.  So this has been going on a long time a few a more troops is going to change things? They really know how stupid we really are, with thoroughly lame logic as that! Read for yourselves here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/09/us/politics/us-afghanistan-troops.html

So irrespective of party in power we are going to pour more money info a country that we totally messed up in the 1980s, when we could have done things at least a little better.

Sigh...such a tremendously sad state of our country.

This is not sad news. I'm encouraged by your revelation.

I'm personally livid at our privately funded two party system - and I have been for a long while now. Hardly anyone seems to get what I'm talking about. It's the privately funded two party system that gave us HRC and DJT to choose from. It's the privately funded two party system that has developed extensive propaganda arms to keep us distracted with wedge issues even as laws are passed that allow corporate profiteering of our government - a prime example being WAR.

So welcome to the club. Spread the word. The DNC and RNC are awful organizations and their existence is an affront to what's supposed to be a democratic system. IMO one is worse than the other, but that hardly matters. This system will continue to give us shit candidates and bullshit issues as a handful of wealthy people + corporations take over everything.

They're taking over prisons, police, schools, public works. And there's little accountability. Cops can take your assets withoug ever charging you with a crime (Civil Asset Forfeiture). IF you're any type of minority, you can be sold off into a private prison for years on petty drug charges. This isn't governance, this is profiteering. Anyone who tells you differently is either stupid or is taking a share in the profits.

Our constitutional rights have been coopted by corporations and money. And here everyone is doing just what the people in control want us doing: bickering over who can use what bathrooms.

So, yes - your revelation is GOOD NEWS. SPREAD THE WORD.

Malaysia41

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3198
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Verona, Italy
    • My mmm journal
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2365 on: February 26, 2017, 03:17:13 PM »
Sorry there were a few typos / ambiguous pronouns in that comment above, but for some reason I'm unable to modify / edit right now. Don't strain an eye muscle reading it!

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1763
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2366 on: February 26, 2017, 03:49:29 PM »
It will be interesting to see DJT address Congress this week.  On one hand, it is Republican-owned so he should be able to swagger in and say whatever he thinks people want to hear.  More of the same would be fine.  But then again, he is inconsistent and prefers going extreme to just delivering on his message.  Probably can't resist the chance to antagonize the Democrats, but might also be willing to alienate Republicans.  Maybe give them hell for not cutting taxes, imploding ACA, approving funds for a wall, and not lining up behind him unilaterally.  I'm expecting a low-water mark for America.  But hey, there's always the chance he comes out well-spoken, respectful of history and his place as leader of the free world, and begins to repair the divisive atmosphere he has cultivated...

jim555

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1816
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2367 on: February 26, 2017, 03:59:34 PM »
Trump is skipping the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  Snowflake might get upset.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2368 on: February 26, 2017, 04:46:28 PM »
Democrats may have been trying to fix health care forever. I'm sick and tired of them fucking it up and failing so god damned always. It's fine if you wish to blame the other party for their failings, but they had a super majority in congress and a progressive president and had their chance to truly improve health care in this country, despite any Republican disagreement . Instead they gave the insurance lobby huge subsidies, the people double digit premium increases and little improvement in Healthcare  outcomes for their trouble. Forgive me that I'm not cutting the corrupt bastards any slack.
BIB: this is no doubt true for some but it is not true for all.  Can it be acknowledged that the ACA has disbenefits for some (usually those who already had good health, good health care and the money to pay for it) and benefits for others (usually those without good health, good health care or the money to pay for it)?  Saying that something is all bad just because it's not all good, or because it's not good for your particular demographic, doesn't take the discussion anywhere.
Yes, clearly some people are better off now. Some people are worse off. Which implies that some people were better off before, while some were worse off. I have no problem with large parts of the ACA.  I am not arguing going back to the old system. What frustrates me is the people who say "some people are better off now, so changing things must be wrong." I think there is so much room for improvement to make everyone better off, or at least more people better off and fewer people worse off, that to not push for those changes because it is a Republican plan or a Democrat plan is terrible for those people who are worse offf. Finger pointing and blame laying from both sides just keeps positive changes from being discussed, and shutting down any conversation because republicans in the 90s didnt vote for single payer or some other silly reason is completely leaving people who are not helped by the current situation out to dry.

I appreciate all of the positive discussion, loads of diverse viewpoints and massive amounts of information in this, and other, threads, especially when I disagree with it. Discussion and information sharing are the best ways to help figure out how to progress and improve the system. So thank you everyone, for this.  The occasional personal attacks are not a particularly positive addition, but hardly worth side tracking on.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2369 on: February 26, 2017, 05:04:14 PM »
Trump is skipping the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  Snowflake might get upset.
snowflake?

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3575
  • Location: Avalon
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2370 on: February 26, 2017, 05:15:03 PM »
Trump is skipping the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  Snowflake might get upset.
snowflake?
now in new orange flavour.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2371 on: February 26, 2017, 05:27:41 PM »
Trump is skipping the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  Snowflake might get upset.
snowflake?
now in new orange flavour.
I'm undecided if his skipping more things would be better or worse...

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2372 on: February 26, 2017, 06:16:22 PM »
Trump is skipping the White House Correspondents' Dinner.  Snowflake might get upset.
snowflake?
now in new orange flavour.
I'm undecided if his skipping more things would be better or worse...
sorry to be so dense, but here DJT is the snowflake?  um... why, exactly? 

Johnez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 880
  • Location: Southern California
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2373 on: February 26, 2017, 07:00:36 PM »
I'm guessing it's because special snowflakes hate criticism.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2374 on: February 26, 2017, 07:10:06 PM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8103
  • Registered member
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2375 on: February 26, 2017, 08:53:25 PM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

It's also used ironically because traditionally conservatives called more extreme liberals snowflakes with respect to social issues and political correctness (e.g., I'm sorry I assumed your gender, you special snowflake, do you need a safe space to discuss your preferred pronouns?).  But recently it's been shown that Trump needs just as much, if not more, coddling than a sophomore women's studies major.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1659
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2376 on: February 27, 2017, 06:11:11 AM »
Revisionist history, ftw. No Republicans voted for the ACA*. The dems had super majority, and could have passed anything they wanted, without worrying about filibusters, and they did. They wanted to give their corporate interests in the insurance lobby a huge government handout, and did so.

Where are you getting this version of history from?  Because that's not what happened.

You may recall that Democrats TRIED to pass single payer health care, back in the 90s, with Hillary Clinton.  Republicans tore it apart.  It has always been Republicans who opposed health care reform of any kind.  It has always been Republicans who solely support their corporate interests at the expense of the working class. 

I'm getting pretty sick and tired of you blaming Democrats for everything.  This is classic Donald Trump behavior, and you should know better.  Are you a 70 year old fat man with a poor diet?  Attack your opponents health and stamina!  Were you born in to a wealthy family?  Campaign on behalf of blue collar workers!  Are you a five time draft dodger?  "No one is better on the military than me!"  Do you hate the American health care system?  Blame the Democrats!

It's disgusting and disingenuous and deceitful and dishonest and it discredits everything else you have to say.  Just stop it.

Democrats have been trying to fix health care since forever.  They passed medicare and medicaid.  They tried to pass single payer.  Due to Republican opposition, they had to settle for a neutered version of the ACA.  You're blaming the wrong party, plain and simple, and you do it SO consistently and SO blatantly dishonestly that I'm struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt (ignorance) instead of taking you at face value (malice).
the people double digit premium increases and little improvement in Healthcare  outcomes for their trouble. Forgive me that I'm not cutting the corrupt bastards any slack.

Some people saw increases. Some people saw little/no increases (like myself). On a personal level it benefitted some folks I know immensely. My mother was able to get healthcare after not being able to afford it for 10+ years (while working 60-90 hours/wk). A staunch Republican I used to work with who retired earlier than normal saved  a shit ton of money by utilizing the ACA over COBRA. He has admitted as much.

Is it a wonderful cure-all? Absolutely not. Is it as bad as you and others I have run across claim? Absolutely not. Your blanket statement should be reworded to reflect reality though.   


nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2377 on: February 27, 2017, 06:12:04 AM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

It's also used ironically because traditionally conservatives called more extreme liberals snowflakes with respect to social issues and political correctness (e.g., I'm sorry I assumed your gender, you special snowflake, do you need a safe space to discuss your preferred pronouns?).  But recently it's been shown that Trump needs just as much, if not more, coddling than a sophomore women's studies major.
Ok, thanks for the explanations.  I had only heard the term "snowflake' used in a derogatory way against people, usually black, who try to act as "white" as possible.  As in: "that suburb-livin' snowflake thinks the B.E.T. is a stock symbol"

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2378 on: February 27, 2017, 09:14:02 AM »
Another impact:  Trump is proposing to increase military spending by $54B, while cutting virtually all other federal agencies by the same amount.


nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2379 on: February 27, 2017, 09:46:09 AM »
As usual, it's a virtual Rorschach test when interpreting Trump's remarks and motives.  He certainly campaigned on cutting the federal government while also restoring our "depleted"* military, but as pointed out above he has also been critical of our military involvement and has said he'd have preferred to spend the money another way. 


*'depleted' is in the eye of the beholder.  As a % of our GDP our military spending is roughly in line with the 50 year average.  OTOH we spend more than the next 8 countries combined on our military, at ~$600B/year. We've got a lot of aging aircraft, ships and vehicles because (in part) we have so many of them to begin with.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2152
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2380 on: February 27, 2017, 10:01:22 AM »

*'depleted' is in the eye of the beholder.  As a % of our GDP our military spending is roughly in line with the 50 year average.  OTOH we spend more than the next 8 countries combined on our military, at ~$600B/year. We've got a lot of aging aircraft, ships and vehicles because (in part) we have so many of them to begin with.

They're also in rough shape from near constant deployments and deferred maintenance.

dragoncar

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8103
  • Registered member
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2381 on: February 27, 2017, 10:14:05 AM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

It's also used ironically because traditionally conservatives called more extreme liberals snowflakes with respect to social issues and political correctness (e.g., I'm sorry I assumed your gender, you special snowflake, do you need a safe space to discuss your preferred pronouns?).  But recently it's been shown that Trump needs just as much, if not more, coddling than a sophomore women's studies major.
Ok, thanks for the explanations.  I had only heard the term "snowflake' used in a derogatory way against people, usually black, who try to act as "white" as possible.  As in: "that suburb-livin' snowflake thinks the B.E.T. is a stock symbol"

It might be a regional/generational thing.  Growing up around here, millenials were typically told unironically that they were "special snowflakes" (meaning unique) and implicitly taught that the world should revolve around their individual needs, leading to them being perceived as entitled

« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 10:17:03 AM by dragoncar »

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2382 on: February 27, 2017, 10:17:18 AM »

*'depleted' is in the eye of the beholder.  As a % of our GDP our military spending is roughly in line with the 50 year average.  OTOH we spend more than the next 8 countries combined on our military, at ~$600B/year. We've got a lot of aging aircraft, ships and vehicles because (in part) we have so many of them to begin with.

They're also in rough shape from near constant deployments and deferred maintenance.

Yeah...as I said everything can be interpreted through the lens of the beholder.  Being under deployment for 15 years certainly has worn things down, an that's the driving reason why many hawks argue that we need to increase the size of our military - so that we can sustain this level of deployment without everything going to pot.  Doves might argue that whatever the size of the military we wind up using it, so a more sensible strategy is to scale back the size of everything, and then we could replace things on a much more frequent basis.

What's odd to me is DJT's dual-insistence that we need to rehabilitate our military while signaling that we won't be as involved with foreign conflicts. To me this is the essence of "we need more money so we can do less with it".

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1073
  • Age: 36
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2383 on: February 27, 2017, 12:48:05 PM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

Snowflakes aren't (visually) unique. Unless you mean unique just like everything is composed of it's own atoms and molecules, but then everything is unique and unique means nothing.

You an put two snowflakes under a microscope and come up with two that look the same pretty easily.

FIRE me

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
  • Location: Louisville, KY
  • So much technology, so little talent.
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2384 on: February 27, 2017, 01:31:29 PM »
And today, on February 27, 2017, the President of the United States of America, Donald J Trump said:
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."


zoltani

  • Guest
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2385 on: February 27, 2017, 01:50:47 PM »
Because he is so special and unique and wonderful. I.e., a special little snowflake. It's generally a derogatory term for people who feel they are special or different.

Snowflakes aren't (visually) unique. Unless you mean unique just like everything is composed of it's own atoms and molecules, but then everything is unique and unique means nothing.

You an put two snowflakes under a microscope and come up with two that look the same pretty easily.

But please tell us how dense they are.

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1522
  • Location: MA
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2386 on: February 27, 2017, 02:01:38 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again? 

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2387 on: February 27, 2017, 02:18:01 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

Retire-Canada

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6697
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2388 on: February 27, 2017, 02:26:42 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

So if we cut both of those there is no spending increase! That's Bigly League thinking!

RangerOne

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2389 on: February 27, 2017, 03:03:21 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

I don't know where that pie chart comes from but I am pretty sure it is either straight out wrong or misleading. We spend a lot on Military but if you include social security and medicare spending it puts things more in perspective. I think some charts leave this out because medicare and social are our two largest expenditures and are supposed to be self sustaining through specific taxes beyond our federal income tax.

http://federal-budget.insidegov.com/l/119/2016

I think this is the better picture to look at because when we talk about paying for something really big like expanding Medicare to create a single payer system, you should be aware medicare spending already outpaces military spending. And our largest expenditure by the fed is for social security.

Obama never quite gave the Military as much money as they requested to facilitate fleet expansion and maintenance they projected would be necessary for future defense I believe with regards to maintaining the balance of power especially naval as threats from China increase.

Trump obviously loves placing himself among strong military leaders and early on promised to basically give them the funds they have been requesting so they can expand our fleet and so on. This I would think is pretty typical of a Republican administration who generally chose to fund defense more heavily.

Also seeing these other pieces of the pie should help remind you that when Republicans chose to attempt to cut spending on medicare or social security and they don't decrease the commensurate taxes for all of us they are essentially pocketing that money for other government spending.... or at least defending a continued raiding of funds that should be dedicated to specific spending.

Another review of the misleading chart:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/
« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 03:06:40 PM by RangerOne »

RangerOne

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2390 on: February 27, 2017, 03:12:19 PM »
All that being increasing military funding given the growing threats to our naval dominance and increase in posturing from Russia is probably advisable for all Western nations. However given that we do spend quite a bit much of our spending could probably be derived by putting pressure on the military to clean up some of its spending to focus on expansion and maintenance and become more efficient in general.

It is completely unclear to me if anyone in the new administration did this kind of analysis before coming up with their proposed funding increase or if they to a degree just said fuck it and are giving them what they asked for base on internal projections alone. I suspect the later, in which case we are probably wasting more money than is necessary.

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2790
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2391 on: February 27, 2017, 03:24:28 PM »
The US government is a giant healthcare/annuity company with a big-ass military. Everything else is basically peanuts.

The basic breakdown is:
25% - healthcare
24% - social security
16% - defense department (some stuff that most people would consider "defense" like nukes isn't included here)
13% - other mandatory programs (mostly noncontroversial stuff)
6% - interest on debt

Leaving 16% for non-defense discretionary spending. Want to fix roads and bridges? Want to spend more on education, or research, or border patrol, or whatever? That's your whole pot of money to work with unless you want to tackle SS/Medicare/Medicaid or military spending first.

-W

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2392 on: February 27, 2017, 03:26:24 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

I don't know where that pie chart comes from but I am pretty sure it is either straight out wrong or misleading. We spend a lot on Military but if you include social security and medicare spending it puts things more in perspective. I think some charts leave this out because medicare and social are our two largest expenditures and are supposed to be self sustaining through specific taxes beyond our federal income tax.

SSI and Medicare/Medicaid are mandatory spending.  The chart (and the website behind it) are referring to discretionary spending, as referenced in the chart title.
This is the whole issue with federal budgets; it cannot touch mandatory spending, which makes up >64% of the total federal revenue.  About 6% annually goes towawrd paying interest on the debt, which leaves just 30% of the $3.8T up for alteration year to year (plus, of course, deficit spending).  But even within the discretionary category that are promised benefits (like VA spending).

RangerOne

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 685
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2393 on: February 27, 2017, 03:29:37 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

I don't know where that pie chart comes from but I am pretty sure it is either straight out wrong or misleading. We spend a lot on Military but if you include social security and medicare spending it puts things more in perspective. I think some charts leave this out because medicare and social are our two largest expenditures and are supposed to be self sustaining through specific taxes beyond our federal income tax.

SSI and Medicare/Medicaid are mandatory spending.  The chart (and the website behind it) are referring to discretionary spending, as referenced in the chart title.
This is the whole issue with federal budgets; it cannot touch mandatory spending, which makes up >64% of the total federal revenue.  About 6% annually goes towawrd paying interest on the debt, which leaves just 30% of the $3.8T up for alteration year to year (plus, of course, deficit spending).  But even within the discretionary category that are promised benefits (like VA spending).

The politifacts check cleared that up for me again. But even excluding mandatory spending that chart is a bit off from the meme.

Also who's to say if we did say expand health care that it wouldn't all become specially taxed mandatory spending. In which case it is beyond the scope of the more limited comparison. If we are talking about what we spend in total on public programs versus what we spend on defense I think we have to include "mandatory" spending to keep things in perspective. Who's to say what wont be mandatory social spending tomorrow.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2017, 03:35:02 PM by RangerOne »

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3060
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2394 on: February 27, 2017, 03:41:20 PM »
And today, on February 27, 2017, the President of the United States of America, Donald J Trump said:
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

In some regards, the ACA worked as designed. By creating a plan -- any plan -- the Democrats made it very difficult to go back. Now, TrumpCare is forced to include some of the non-controversial aspects of ACA.

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8462
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2395 on: February 27, 2017, 03:43:55 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

I don't know where that pie chart comes from but I am pretty sure it is either straight out wrong or misleading. We spend a lot on Military but if you include social security and medicare spending it puts things more in perspective. I think some charts leave this out because medicare and social are our two largest expenditures and are supposed to be self sustaining through specific taxes beyond our federal income tax.

SSI and Medicare/Medicaid are mandatory spending.  The chart (and the website behind it) are referring to discretionary spending, as referenced in the chart title.
This is the whole issue with federal budgets; it cannot touch mandatory spending, which makes up >64% of the total federal revenue.  About 6% annually goes towawrd paying interest on the debt, which leaves just 30% of the $3.8T up for alteration year to year (plus, of course, deficit spending).  But even within the discretionary category that are promised benefits (like VA spending).

The politifacts check cleared that up for me again. But even excluding mandatory spending that chart is a bit off from the meme.

Also who's to say if we did say expand health care that it wouldn't all become specially taxed mandatory spending. In which case it is beyond the scope of the more limited comparison. If we are talking about what we spend in total on public programs versus what we spend on defense I think we have to include "mandatory" spending to keep things in perspective. Who's to say what wont be mandatory social spending tomorrow.

Well the chart politifacts reviewed was misleading from the start in part because it lacked a title (i.e. did not say discretionary spending).

Discretionary spending is what can be influenced on an annual basis by the passing of the federal budget.  Mandatory is required by existing law, and cannot be changed except with the passage of a NEW law. I agree that it's important to keep things in perspective, and worth noting that SSI and Medicare both cost more than the military.  But since the topic was DJT's changes in the military budget it only makes sense to consider discretionary spending, since this is the only spending he and the GOP will be dealing with in their budget proposals.

Unique User

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2396 on: February 27, 2017, 05:08:46 PM »
And today, on February 27, 2017, the President of the United States of America, Donald J Trump said:
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

Nobody = him.  Everyone else knew damn well that health care is complicated.  Where is his plan that he touted during the campaign?  Oh right, it's complicated. 

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11842
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2397 on: February 27, 2017, 06:33:42 PM »
And today, on February 27, 2017, the President of the United States of America, Donald J Trump said:
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."

Nobody = him.  Everyone else knew damn well that health care is complicated.  Where is his plan that he touted during the campaign?  Oh right, it's complicated.

No, not complicated.  Lies are pretty straight forward.

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2398 on: February 27, 2017, 07:29:44 PM »
And today, on February 27, 2017, the President of the United States of America, Donald J Trump said:
"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated."
I choked on my bourbon when I read this...

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5306
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: What are the realistic impacts of a Trump presidency?
« Reply #2399 on: February 27, 2017, 07:43:02 PM »
54 billion in military spending with no major conflicts.  I guess deficits don't matter again?
worth noting: the proposed increase in military spending is about what we spend annually on science and transportation combined.
Source.

So if we cut both of those there is no spending increase! That's Bigly League thinking!
Genius!

But seriously, the US military, the us navy particularly, has brought unprecedented levels of world peace to the planet over the past 7 decades. This doesn't mean that more is better, but it's not as if ensuring free trade for every country on the planet and worldwide energy access is worthless. People take it for granted, but this was not always so.