Hello Friend,
If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.
It will be the most efficient use of your time.
And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.
Thank you for visiting and have a great day!
I largely blame Paul Ryan for this. He publicly complained about Obamacare, but did he work on a sound alternative to replace it? No.
Yep... It was a Republican creation.
And who voted him in as Speaker.... Republicans.
This totally did not happen. The President NEVER articulated a healthcare plan. He floated out the idea of medical cost transparency and eliminating State insurance regulation.... But neither of those things will have done anything to lower healthcare costs. It's right wing talk radio talking points. Insurance is built on a actuary, insurance rates you pay is based on the cost of healthcare. It is treating a symptom of the problem, and not the problem itself. All this would do is spread out the overall cost of insurance... in markets where healthcare is high, insurance cost MIGHT come down, in markets where insurance is low... cost of insurance WILL go up. Anyway... it won't work. Large insurance companies will not go into markets where they LOSE MONEY, and just because a large insurance company can go where ever they want, does not mean they will. Another problem is who will regulate insurance companies if States can't do this? For this to work we would need to have a new Federal Department to regulate insurers... if anyone believe the Federal Government can regulate insurance companies more efficiently than States... well.... all I'm going to say is this in NOT a conservative position. In addition, it would violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, and Commerce clause... the same argument that conservatives used to argue against Obamacare. It is conservative hypocrisy. Price transparency is not a bad idea... but how is this going to be enforced? Again, you would need a new department of the Federal government to make sure this happens. Insurance is very complicated... you get what you pay for... it's never a hard and fast apples to apples comparison. You would have to define federal standards for everything. A pure free-market solution for healthcare will not work, unless you make it illegal to treat anyone that does not have a means to pay. If you drive without car insurance, and you get in a wreak, you have broken the LAW, and you face legal consequences. If you do not have health insurance and you show in in an emergency room, you are NOT punished... the healthcare providers MUST treat you... there are no consequences for your lack of compliance.
You miss my point. This isn't about McCain... I don't have a problem with people being critical of McCain's political positions... This is fair game. It's about the President's childish behavior. Sometimes in life we have to work with others to get what we want. And when you go around and launch personal attacks having NOTHING to to with someone's political positions this is not how you win people over... especially someone that have nothing to lose (since he was dying) to spit in your face. It's about prudence. Ted Cruz has always been a weak kneed little worm... Who still has dreams of greatness... his response to Trump is not thick skinned, it is weakness.... Cruz doesn't have a problem kissing the @ss of anyone he thinks will help him... So it's not a shock that he bent over to the President after he insulted his wife and accused his father of murder. If the President ever falls out of favor with his supporters, Cruz will be back on the bash Trump bandwagon... All the President had to do is NOT insult McCain... Jesus... it isn't rocket science. But the stupid attacks on McCain's service... resurrecting an old story that had been set aside DECADES ago about an incident on the USS Forrestal, and suggesting that someone that had been captured by the enemy is not a hero.... None of that is helpful to your overall purpose.
McCain voted 40 times to repeal Obamacare. So you assumptions are incorrect. Again... even if what you said is true... which it is not, then only a fool believes that the way you change the mind of someone that has NOTHING to lose from spitting in your face, is to insult him. If the President had treated McCain the same way he treated the North Korean dictator Obamacare would be gone. Think about that for a minute.
Nixon didn't like half-breeds and mouthed off against the mixed race and he masterminded the war on drugs which led to a whole generations of Black people ending up in jail over nothing.
That is because you are not targeted by the police and they are your own personal goon squad. The police do not currently enforce laws or apprehend criminals if they are white in the same way they do against Blacks. A white person has to do something egregious to get treated seriously in the criminal justice system. A black person just has to be at the wrong place at the wrong time with a racist cop. The problem is they only enforce laws and apprehend criminals if they are non-white or black. Would you agree that if police treated whites THE SAME EXACT WAY they treat blacks that this would be a better solution and see white population start to skyrocket in the prison population as well? Would you vote for a politician that advocated to put more white people behind bars? Would you vote for a politician that would encourage police to plant drugs on whites as long as it brings up the prison population and give cops promotions who do this? No. Of course not! But you would if it's against Blacks? So your position is laughable because you would never take your own medicine.
Nixon had 35% support of Black voters. No Republican President since FDR has done that well. Yea... he was a product of his time and had problems with race, religion, and gender. But he never allowed his person prejudice get in the way of doing his job. He supported affirmative action, his national security advisor was Jewish, in fact he had more Jewish people working in his administration than any other President other than Clinton. Everyone was SHOCKED when he released his private White House tapes to hear him vocalize his personal prejudice in anti Semitic and racist rants, because there was nothing in his public life that indicated his prejudice. Nixon really did not start the 'war on drugs', although he did create the DEA to better coordinate with law-enforcement in the States with drug traffic across State lines. When Nixon left office, there were only 600 special agents, and no NEW jobs or positions were created, rather the BNDD, ODALE, Bureau of Customs, and Customs Agency Service were merged. This was done for efficiency. The war on drugs did not start until Reagan... when this agency ballooned and now has 10,000 employees with almost 4,000 special agents, with a 3 plus billion dollar budget.
It feels worst today than the late 70s because you still did not have the crack cocaine planted by the C.I.A. in the Black communities to fund the Contras in Panama as a pretext for mass incarceration. You didn't have cops getting off with video-taped murders of Black citizens. There was still an innocence about that time that is not going to be there today. When certain lines get crossed things just get more ugly.
OJ Simpson is an anomaly. What about Bill Cosby, he's wealthy isn't he? He ended up in jail over accusations from a white woman. Trump would also be in jail if the same standards were applied to him.RangerMike said:
If its your assertion that prisons are full of murderers, rapists and others who are prone to violence because the charges against them were made up and the victims of those crimes conspired with police to frame "blacks" when white people were guilty then you're the one with the laughable position. Your assertion requires a lot of murdered, raped or assaulted victims of white perpetrated violence to exist that simply do not. If you are asserting that all races commit crimes at the same rate and the only explanation for the disparity in incarceration rates is racist cops then you are similarly delusional or misinformed. I do agree that the drug war is misguided and needs to be refocused elsewhere and I also agree there are racist cops but to blame the current reality, with regards to crime, on a vast conspiracy of both victims and cops just making up black crimes and ignoring white crimes is the very definition of laughable.
I'm not asserting that position, but of course, there are many cases where Blacks on death-row or had long sentences were later exonerated by DNA evidence. However, it's not my assertion that this is the premise of mass incarceration. Low-level non-violent drug or victimless crimes are more the issue with those and malicious enforcement of those type of offences against Blacks. The majority of the issues are really issues that you, as a white person, would never see jail time or get arrested for in the first place. These other crimes are too serious and would never be at issue with stop & frisk or broken windows type of policies.
This is exactly my assertion. I think you are misinformed and delusional if you think otherwise.Hall9000 said:
With regards to non-violent victimless crime...come on, you are kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Do you just listen to Fox news? Black people do not feel free in America and feel like they are under seize with law enforcement. You can be going around your own business and just out of the blue get confronted by a bunch of cops and potentially end up in jail or in a casket for nothing you did at all, and these type of things happen very fast. If you flinch or misunderstand the cops instructions you could be shot by the cops who could claim they feared for their lives. You could be charged with resisting arrest and causing a public disturbance for asking the cops why they are arresting you in the first place or trying to explain your side of the story. I'm sure you don't feel that way, that if you aren't doing anything wrong, and just going about your business, probably nothing will happen to you.Hall9000 said:
As a cop, do you agree with what I have asserted concerning police culture in America? Do you believe that most of the Black people that you see in jail arrested by other corrupt cops in your department are innocent and they are just trying to make arrest quotas?
Being completely honest in my department in a City of about 15,000 people South of Chicago we treat blacks 100% fairly. And the blacks in our town treat us fairly. We have have great relations with them. But the department I worked for before this did not and yes I saw some blacks get arrested with a racial bias to it. There was one officer who I told the Chief I would not work with and said if I get put on a shift with him on duty I would call in sick. He eventually resigned over some stuff he was accused of but then it got cleared and they later rehired him.
That officer got hired to another department? That's the issue, the higher ups in the echelon of power gives these types of officer a pass. That makes for a two tiered police experience when cops like that patrol the streets and harass black people and this in turn creates a divisive society.
Why? You don't actually believe my opinion actually means anything. You really should not let people get to you who are only expressing an opinion.
I guess we could go back and forth with yes he did, no he didn’t… But let’s say he did. Well where is it? Why hasn’t he done this? He failed…. Sorry I know this hurts but he does not have the ability to convince others to his position. Bottom line the President failed to deliver.
Feifdom… you mean States? The Federal Government does not have the right to regulate interstate trade, which includes insurance. You are suggesting we establish national regulation of the insurance industry. Let’s have that debate, but insurers can already move across State lines and sell insurance, they just have to comply with State laws when they do this, many choose not to do this. Now if you are suggesting the we FORCE insurance companies to do this… well… okay, let’s have that debate…. But why stop there… why not have national voting standards, national car insurance standards, a national ID card…. Heck let’s just do away with States all together.
You are changing the subject, but okay…. States regulate abortion…. This is what Roe v Wade says, and it’s pretty much been this way for 50 years. Moral objections notwithstanding, abortion is a legal medical procedure. Now personally I find abortion abhorrent and if it was made illegal I wouldn’t have a problem with that…. The unborn do not have civil rights protection, they have no standing in the courts. If social conservatives were really serious about getting rid of abortion they would press for a Constitutional Amendment granting protect to the unborn… I’m still waiting for this to happen.
Funny… I could say the same to you. I believe that what is happening today is that many on the right have lost faith in the political process and democracy. It certainly isn’t perfect, but it’s better than civil war.
You can make the argument that the Fed is unconstitutional along 4 lines of thought, but these arguments have failed in the courts, so it isn’t… that is how our government works. Now I happen to agree that we should do something about the FED because it has gone way past its original mandate which was to control inflation. This is a VERY complicated process, and something worthy of a serious discussion. But going back on the Gold Standard now, would have its own set of problems that would have to be addressed. The Department of Education, and a NUMBER of Federal departments are unnecessary and counterproductive. But their formations have also been upheld by the courts. Carter created the Department of Education, and it was a bad idea then and still is. The President could have gotten rid of it during the 1st two years of his administration, but he didn’t. The IRS was created by the 16th amendment, so it is constitutional. I would totally support repealing the 16th amendment. Something I would love to see the President take on.
It is complicated because medical treatment is not in a vacuum. Medical advances are made every day… everyday new drugs and treatments are made available. MDs keeping up with medical advances is almost a full-time job, that is why we have a vast array of specialties. Many of these new treatments are more expensive, with no track record of effectiveness, because they are new. And what you are paying for insurance is built on an actuary based on treatment available at the time the policy was signed. So anything developed AFTER the ‘contract’ isn’t covered. It’s not like fixing a car, if you get your car wreaked, your insurance company evaluates the cost of the damage, and if the repair coast more than the value of the car, it’s ‘totaled” and they cut you a check for the value of the car. You can not do this with human beings, you can not get a new body… when the body dies, your done. So any small amount of percentage chance something expensive MIGHT work, you want to do it… Insurance companies, naturally don’t want to pay out something they will never recover since you are dead. If we had car insurance that that required insurers to continue to repair 70 year old cars, the cost of accident insurance would also be very high. So health insurance is not a simple ‘contract’.
I honestly do not know why you continue with this little digs and insults. I have not personally attacked you , only your positions. Ideas should be challenged, that is how we learn. I like my ideas challenged, my ideas are not me, I can evolve. You are free to try and change my mind… but you are not going to change my mind with insult… only rational argument. Having said that. Healthcare does not fit a ‘free-market’ model. Free markets work when what you pay for gives you a return on investment. There has to be a consideration for the exchange of goods and service…. And this exchange has to be equitable, or the model fails. So if we consider healthcare…. We will spend whatever amount of money we have to in an attempt to save a loved one. We do not do this with pets… we put them down. No one is going to spend several thousand dollars or go into massive debt to save a 17 year old dog. We are also not going to spend thousands of dollars a year, keeping an old car road worthy when you have to pay butt loads of money having custom parts fabricated. The simple true, in a Machiavellian sense is that the more we spend on healthcare, the less we have an opportunity to return economic value. I AM NOT suggesting we should adopt this model, so please do not accuse me of suggesting we should just ‘put down’ the sick and old… what I am saying is that since we WILL NOT do this because we are human being that value life above all else, the pure free-market is not going to work. Since economically it will not work, mostly because advances in medical science has made saving people and prolonging life possible, then we have to adjust or thinking to come to grips with the new reality.
