Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


Human101948's Journal
Human101948's Journal
March 30, 2016

Marco Rubio is right! Alaska is one of those "Untied States"

Marco Rubio Misspells 'United States' In Letter To Alaska GOP

It's been a rough month for Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL).

After dropping out of the Republican presidential race after his home state primary, Rubio sent a letter asking the Alaska GOP not to release his bound delegates before the national convention.

There was just one thing amiss: he referred to the delegates he won running for the highest office in the "Untied States."


There is absolutely no physical connection to the other 48!
March 30, 2016

Donald Trump, Revoking a Vow, Says He Won’t Support Another G.O.P. Nominee

Donald J. Trump said on Tuesday night that he no longer vowed to
support the Republican nominee if it isn’t him, despite a loyalty pledge that all
Republican primary candidates signed last year.

“No, I don’t anymore,” Mr. Trump said at a town hall forum on CNN when
prompted by the moderator, Anderson Cooper. “No, we’ll see who it is.”
When Mr. Cooper pointed out that Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Mr.
Trump’s chief rival for the nomination, had walked up to the line but not
crossed it in terms of saying he wouldn’t support the nominee, Mr. Trump
replied, “He doesn’t have to support me.”


Looks like this Republican nomination process just got more fun!
March 28, 2016

Was the Capitol attack another Christian terrorist incident?

Should we surveille Christian neighborhoods to prevent similar incidents? why are we seeing no photos of the atacker?

March 27, 2016

Right Wing Talk-- Xpost from Hillary Group: Vermont's Single-Payer Dream Is Taxpayer Nightmare


Of the plans that states have hatched for the Affordable Care Act, none has been bolder than that of Vermont, which wants to implement a single-payer health-care system, along the lines of what you might find in Britain or Canada. One government-operated system will cover all 620,000 of Vermont's citizens. The hope is that such a system will allow Vermont to get costs down closer to Canada's, as well as improve health by coordinating care and ensuring universal coverage.

Just two small issues need to be resolved before the state gets to all systems go: First, it needs the federal government to grant waivers allowing Vermont to divert Medicaid and other health-care funding into the single-payer system. And second, Vermont needs to find some way to pay for it:

Now comes the big challenge: paying for it. Act 48 required Vermont to create a single-payer system by 2017. But the state hasn't drafted a bill that spells out how to raise the approximately $2 billion a year Vermont needs to run the system. The state collects only $2.7 billion in tax revenue each year, so an additional $2 billion is a vexingly large sum to scrape together.
Vermont is a middling-tax state, as states go. And that's not an accident; its population consists of longtime Vermonters, some of whom vote Republican (at least for governor) and are not super-tax-friendly, and transplants from Massachusetts and New York state, who, last time I looked, had moved to Vermont partly because the taxes were lower. Paying for this program would likely make Vermont the highest-taxed state in the nation, by quite a lot.

Now, you can argue that people should be glad to make this trade-off, not just for peace of mind, but because they will trade higher taxes for lower (no) insurance premiums. You can also argue that poor people in America should be laughing and dancing and singing all day because every one of them is economically better off than starving farmers in drought-ridden regions of Africa. Neither argument will do you much good, however, because that's not how people think.

Especially when you consider that estimates for this plan's cost are likely to err on the optimistic side, because, well, people drawing up proposed budgets for their pet ideas tend to be a little optimistic. Yes, yes, there may be fabulous cost savings from using the government's monopoly buying power to bargain prices down with providers. But Vermont is already the beneficiary of significant monopoly buying power: One insurer has 74 percent of the state's small-group business. It's a Blue Cross/Blue Shield, so don't count on fabulous savings from squeezing out profits. The large group market is even more concentrated, though on a for-profit insurer.

Nor can you get much administrative saving at the provider level, because they still have to deal with out-of-state insurers quite a bit. And the once-vaunted fabulous savings from preventative care have mostly turned out not to exist.

So this is going to be expensive. So expensive that I doubt Vermont is actually going to go forward with it.

This should be instructive for those who hope -- or fear -- that Obamacare has all been an elaborate preliminary to a nationwide single-payer system. It isn't. The politics are impossible, and even if they weren't, the financing would be unthinkable.


In 2011, the Vermont state government enacted a law functionally establishing the first state-level single-payer health care system in the United States. Green Mountain Care, established by the passage of H.202, creates a system in the state where Vermonters receive universal health care coverage as well as technological improvements to the existing system.

On December 17, 2014, Vermont Democrats abandoned their plan for universal health care, citing the taxes required of smaller businesses within the state.

Posted here so the 750+ DUers banned from Hillary Group can comment

March 24, 2016

Corinthian College ordered to pay over $1 billion for misleading students

A California judge ordered a now-defunct for-profit college chain to pay more than $1 billion Wednesday over claims the company misled students and investors.

The judgment is the latest step in a suit filed against Corinthian Colleges and its California subsidiaries by California Attorney General Kamala Harris in 2013. In the more than 20 page document, Judge Curtis Karnow ordered the school to pay $820 million to affected students and more than $350 million in civil penalties.

It’s unlikely former students will get that money from Corinthian’s pockets, though. The company filed for bankruptcy in May and listed assets of $19.2 million. A judge later approved a plan for the company to liquidate its assets.


Another entreprenurial Republican style free market scam!

March 17, 2016

NY Times Opinion: Hillary will tell them to "Cut it out!"

Clinton’s Bold Vision, Hidden in Plain

... Moreover, unlike Mr. Sanders, she sees this role as
primarily focused on correcting the shortcomings of weakly regulated markets
rather than redistributing income and wealth.
In a phrase, Mrs. Clinton
believes in a “mixed economy” in which government serves as an essential
supplement to and regulator of markets, using its strong “thumb” (as the
political economist Charles Lindblom once described it) to assist and
counterbalance the nimble “fingers” of the market.

Emphasis added

The authors are plugging their book which theorizes that it was Republicans and Democrats working together that created prosperity for the masses. It seems to me that history shows that Republicans had to be dragged kicking and screaming into income equality then (mid 1900s) and then fought their way back to tilt the playing field once again in favor of the one percent with help from the half-assed Democrats.
March 16, 2016

For the 700 DUers banned from the Hillary Group, comment here on questionable post on Bernie...

Moment of Truth: The Decision that Derailed Bernie’s Campaign

Bernie Sanders has done many things right in this race — and one thing very wrong. It is the wrong decision that I believe partially accounts for his poor showing on March 15th.

Let’s start with what’s right about Bernie’s message: he is a passionate purveyor of core progressive principles who has activated and energized millions of young voters. He speaks with conviction about crucial issues and he has helped bring those issues to the fore in 2016.

Here’s what’s wrong, terribly wrong: He caved to the pressure from his campaign manager Jeff Weaver and top aide Tad Devine to ride the ever-present wave of Hillary hate and to go after her character, impugning her honesty and insinuating that she is untrustworthy.

As I’ve argued, Bernie’s Wall Street dog whistle is a barely concealed attempt to accuse Hillary Clinton of corruption, despite the fact that he lacks a scintilla of evidence to support that claim. No matter how lofty and inspiring his message, it is deeply unjust – and frankly, reckless – to run a campaign premised on the destruction of Hillary’s character through false innuendo. Especially when Democrats are facing a dangerous opponent like Donald Trump in a general election.

March 16, 2016

The drumbeat now: Give up Bernie supporters, the alternative to Hillary is nuclear apocalypse...

if Trump wins because of all you recalcitrant Bernie bros. Just heard a Democratic operative posing that argument on BBC.

Profile Information

Member since: Thu Apr 23, 2015, 02:54 PM
Number of posts: 3,457
Latest Discussions»Human101948's Journal