Where Do YOU Stand On These 3 Issues?

  

Category:  News & Politics

By:  citizen-kane-473667  •  last year  •  86 comments

Where Do YOU Stand On These 3 Issues?

     1)  Illegal Immigration:

For me, it is pretty simple: It needs to be stopped! While I do agree there are much needed reforms to be made, Open Borders is a non-starter. A secure border is necessary for National Security, Human Rights, and health reasons.

    2) Campaign Funding

I am against anyone donating more than $100 to a political campaign. Any more than that, and the contribution becomes a bribe IMHO. It is true that this amount will not raise enough money to buy television/print ads, but I believe we can design a system to supply airtime and coverage to everyone running equally.

     3) Healthcare

I personally find it disgusting that so much of the costs of modern healthcare goes towards corporate profits. The profiteering of pain and misery is an affront to basic morality. I equate it with people who fight dogs or chickens for a living. They too disgust me! This does NOT mean that I do not support making money and profit off of elective, non-essential medical procedures. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
1  author  Citizen Kane-473667    last year
     1)  Illegal Immigration:

The biggest problem isn't those sneaking across the border in the middle of the night, it is those overstaying their visa's. This can be solved through the use of technology like we do with people placed under house arrest--monitoring devices!

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @1    last year

Do you mean they would have to wear an electronic anklet?

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
1.1.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @1.1    last year

I do believe we could come up with a fashionable bracelet that would do the same job and also provide useful tools at the same time like a smart watch does. We could also link it to an app that they would have on a smartphone where they could keep INS appraised of not only their location, but their travel plans as well. The app could be linked to such things as Waze or Google maps for providing directions, Travelocity or TripAdvisor to get them cheap tickets and recommend places to visit, and other such things to enhance their visit. No need to make them feel like a prisoner!

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
1.2  Krishna  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @1    last year
This can be solved through the use of technology like we do with people placed under house arrest--monitoring devices!

And while we're at it-- why not use these devices on those exceptionally evil folks who contribute more than $100 to a political campaign as well!

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
1.2.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Krishna @1.2    last year

I think court-ordered wiretaps would do more good on those folks,,,

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
PhD Principal
1.2.2  Release The Kraken  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @1.2.1    last year

Should we have James Comey sign off on them?

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
1.2.3  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Release The Kraken @1.2.2    last year

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.3  devangelical  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @1    last year

I won't discuss illegal immigration until punishment for those that indirectly invited them here and then facilitated their stay by employing them and skirting legal documentation of their status is included. the starting point is the day ronny raygun granted amnesty in the 80's. the federal fine precedent for undocumented workers being here without a work visa was set by ICE at $800 per day.

enforce it against those that employed them, I don't care what side of the political aisle they sit on. first we need to alter/negate corporate bankruptcy laws for immigration violations and make those in the executive chain of those employment decisions and board members financially responsible as well, right down to all financial assets held by immediate family members with forensic financial research. any attempts shown to hide assets means mandatory minimum 10 year federal prison time with no commutations, pardons, or parole.

if undocumented workers brought their underage kids with them, give those kids a path to citizenship. if their kids were born here, they are citizens. if they served in the US military, they are citizens. federally standardize documentation for employment by legislation. make employers also responsible for restitution plus interest for any state and federal entitlements paid to undocumented workers and their families by taxpayers. for those undocumented workers that have no interest in becoming US citizens, pay them a percentage bounty to turn in their employers, fingerprint them, and send them back to their countries at their own expense with a warning that if they come back without a visa they will be federally prosecuted for violating US immigration law twice.

give the undocumented employers an out to sponsor citizenship for each of those undocumented workers and family members at half a million dollars per, payable to the US treasury. do the math on that at 20+ million undocumented persons here. fix the immigration problem, fix a major part of the federal deficit, fix corporate abuse of wage suppression by hiring undocumented workers, and shed a shitload of 6/7 figure do next to nothing for a paycheck executive/board positions in corporate america.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
1.3.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  devangelical @1.3    last year
I won't discuss illegal immigration until punishment for those that indirectly invited them here and then facilitated their stay by employing them and skirting legal documentation of their status is included.

That, in a nutshell, has been my proposed answer to the problem from the beginning. No need for mass deportations if they can't find a job or a place to live!

if undocumented workers brought their underage kids with them, give those kids a path to citizenship.

I would be willing to let them follow the same path that documented immigrants have to follow to gain citizenship, but once they turn 18, the parents should be sent home and put at the back of the line for getting in the right way.

give the undocumented employers an out to sponsor citizenship for each of those undocumented workers and family members at half a million dollars per,

GREAT IDEA!  Watch how fast those employers decide that paying a little more in hourly wages to a legal citizen is cheaper than facing that fine!  BOOM!  Problem solved!

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
2  author  Citizen Kane-473667    last year
     2) Campaign Funding

Campaign ads should be treated as PSA's and be broadcast/printed free of charge. A set number should be allowed to the candidates, and they must address their stance on current issues, not attack ads against opponents.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1  devangelical  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @2    last year

you already know my viewpoints on this and we're both pretty much aligned on the subject. I'm not going back to look for it. make it extremely financially painful to spend more than $250 to support any candidate. federally standardize mail in ballots and/or make election day a paid holiday. tax the living fuck out of PAC's and lobbyists to fund elections, and toss any FEC law breakers and vote suppressors into prison and throw away the key.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
3  author  Citizen Kane-473667    last year
     3) Healthcare

Medical research should be the purview of the Government via Universities/Government Laboratories with a focus on finding cures, not just treating symptoms of major and minor illnesses. Cosmetic research should remain with private companies without any government funded research.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1  devangelical  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3    last year

use extreme IRS tax leverage to negotiate fairness from organizations that own hospitals, big pharma, and medical insurance providers. end the corporate shell games that have essentially turned health care into socialized medicine with the taxpayers footing the bill. current events have clearly illustrated that healthcare is now a national security issue.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
3.1.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  devangelical @3.1    last year
current events have clearly illustrated that healthcare is now a national security issue

Which to me is just another reason that we should have Socialized Medicine for everything from a checkup to open heart surgery!  Now your tummy tuck?  Well, let's just say that unless it presents a problem for your internal organs, you're on your own to get that done...

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.2  devangelical  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3.1.1    last year

I agree. those that want non-essential cosmetic surgeries can pay the price. let the wealthy feast upon each other at their own expense.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3.1.1    last year

It’s so much more complicated than that.    Who decides what is elective surgery and what isn’t?     Some bureaucrat in DC?    No thanks.    I prefer to leave that where it belongs.    Between the patient and the doctor.

Socialized medicine will take many decisions like that away from the people.    You say if people want “elective surgery” they should pay for it out of their own pocket.    That discriminates against people who can’t afford it.    Lower income people.

When in doubt I tend to error on the side of liberty and not  bureaucratic prohibition social medicine promises to offer.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
3.1.4  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.3    last year
 That discriminates against people who can’t afford it.

Good! Poor people don't need cosmetic surgery that goes wrong and they spend months or years recovering from it, missing work, loosing everything they have because they have no income.  Leave that to the rich assholes who can afford not to work!

Who decides what is elective surgery and what isn’t?

My guess would be:

So...who decides what medical procedures are essential...and which are not?

Those are already pretty well established within the medial community. Commonly known as "elective" surgeries/procedures. Granted, some things will be in a "gray" area that will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis, like a nose job to cure apnea, and that should be decided by a board of professionals within those fields.

As to this:

Socialized medicine will take many decisions like that away from the people.

No it wouldn't, at least when it comes to Essential Healthcare. Remember, I'm the one saying that Government should be only providing oversight of the success rate of the facility and providing the facilities and supplies. The actual decisions on treatment are being left to the healthcare professionals and the patients.

When in doubt

Sooner or later we will be moving into Socialized Healthcare. Keep in mind we are the LAST 1st World country that doesn't have it , and yet Third World countries such as Cuba do.  Saying we can't do it because we have other problems with bureaucracy is a defeatist stance. Instead of saying " We Can't ", try figuring out what protections would need to be built into the system that would address your concerns. Share your ideas so that when we finally do move forward with Socialized Medicine, at least you will have helped to educate people on the pitfalls to be aware of and how we can avoid them. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3.1.4    last year
Good! Poor people don't need cosmetic surgery that goes wrong and they spend months or years recovering from it, missing work, loosing everything they have because they have no income.  Leave that to the rich assholes who can afford not to work!

Wow, that’s really nice of you to be making decisions like that for people of less means comrade.     Not all cosmetic surgery are face lifts and tummy tucks you know.    And rich assholes?    Really?    I think you might be living in the wrong country.    

I guess I might be one of those rich assholes.   And like many of my fellow rich asshole I worked my ass off to get there.    I take great umbrage to comments like that and is one of the reasons I chaff at any mention of socialized medicine.    No way hard working “rich assholes” deserve that kind of attitude after all we have done for this country.    No way!

Sooner or later we will be moving into Socialized Healthcare. Keep in mind we are the LAST 1st World country that doesn't have it , and yet Third World countries such as Cuba do.  Saying we can't do it because we have other problems with bureaucracy is a defeatist stance. Instead of saying " We Can't ", try figuring out what protections would need to be built into the system that would address your concerns. Share your ideas so that when we finally do move forward with Socialized Medicine, at least you will have helped to educate people on the pitfalls to be aware of and how we can avoid them.

Yeah, tell it to the Canadians that have to come here to get surgeries done because theIr socialized medicine capacity controls elongate wait time significantly.    And that’s just one example.    The Fed can’t even run the VA well.    Arguably a form of socialized medicine and thats for like 30-40 times fewer people.    Our Fed as they stand now running a whole country single payer socialized health care system has clusterfuck written all over it.

Your rose colored glasses view of socialized medicine will come at a significant cost in a time when most localities are having trouble convincing tax payers to pass simple operational millages all over the country.    And you think people are going to readily accept the MUCH greater tax increases that socialized medicine will require?

Guess again my friend.    Guess again.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
3.1.6  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.5    last year
Wow, that’s really nice of you to be making decisions like that for people of less means comrade.

Who's paying for their elective surgeries now??? Oh yeah; THEY ARE!

Not all cosmetic surgery are face lifts and tummy tucks you know.

Have you actually read the replies I've been posting where that fact was acknowledged already? Once again, whether or not a treatment is essential to the well being of the patient would be decided by their healthcare professionals.  Even then, like now, they would have a right to a second opinion.

I guess I might be one of those rich assholes.  

Only you would know for sure about that.

theIr socialized medicine capacity controls elongate wait time significantly

What kind of surgeries are wait-listed?  Oh yeah, elective surgeries . They go behind those that need the surgeries more than they do.  But I guess if you are as rich as you claim to be, you could just put your own surgeon on staff in your private clinic and avoid those wait times...

the MUCH greater tax increases that socialized medicine will require

Yep, taxes would go up. According to this breakdown analysis it would cost on average a little less than $1,000 per person in increased taxes to cover everyone! Considering my employer and I pay $1,400 X 12 = $16,500 per year, I would see a big savings in my costs per year (projected to be about $6,862) . Enough that even if my employer, who pays half my costs, were to pay the same amount they currently do, it would cover 1.2 more people than myself alone. So let's add that extra $1,000 to my original costs of $6,862 and subtract it from my current costs on just my end of my insurance through work and I still wind up saving $382 just on payments alone. Throw in only having to pay 20% of my $7500 per year of deductibles and my co-pays to match the Netherlands model these figures were derived from and, damn ! that Universal Care is looking better and better all the time!

Sorry, but the actual facts are not on your side on this one...

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.1.7  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3.1.6    last year
Who's paying for their elective surgeries now??? Oh yeah; THEY ARE!

Bullshit.    Most insurance plans do pay for elective surgeries.   Usually not 100% but to say that they don’t pay is BS.

Have you actually read the replies I've been posting where that fact was acknowledged already? Once again, whether or not a treatment is essential to the well being of the patient would be decided by their healthcare professionals.  Even then, like now, they would have a right to a second opinion.

So that isn’t done now in the present system? 

Only you would know for sure about that.

That comment doesn’t even rate a reply.

What kind of surgeries are wait-listed?  Oh yeah, elective surgeries . They go behind those that need the surgeries more than they do.  But I guess if you are as rich as you claim to be, you could just put your own surgeon on staff in your private clinic and avoid those wait times...

[ deleted ]

Yep, taxes would go up. According to this breakdown analysis it would cost on average a little less than $1,000 per person in increased taxes to cover everyone! Considering my employer and I pay $1,400 X 12 = $16,500 per year, I would see a big savings in my costs per year (projected to be about $6,862) . Enough that even if my employer, who pays half my costs, were to pay the same amount they currently do, it would cover 1.2 more people than myself alone. So let's add that extra $1,000 to my original costs of $6,862 and subtract it from my current costs on just my end of my insurance through work and I still wind up saving $382 just on payments alone. Throw in only having to pay 20% of my $7500 per year of deductibles and my co-pays to match the Netherlands model these figures were derived from and, damn ! that Universal Care is looking better and better all the time! Sorry, but the actual facts are not on your side on this one.

Really?    So where is the estimated 3+ trillion a year going to come from?

[ deleted ]

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
3.1.8  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.7    last year
Most insurance plans do pay for elective surgeries.

Hmmm, you mean the same ones that I already stated my proposal would cover???

Your healthcare plan will cover elective procedures when medically necessary. Medically necessary means services or supplies needed to diagnose or treat an illness, injury, condition, disease, or its symptoms.

On the other hand, yeah, you would still be paying for that Botox, and liposuction, and bigger tits...

Source

So that isn’t done now in the present system?

Where did I say that? You forget that I am trying to get us to where we are enjoying the same or better quality of care we receive now, but with lowered costs by eliminating the Profiteering off of Pain and Suffering.

Really?    So where is the estimated 3+ trillion a year going to come from?

Already covered in the provided link above, but to make it easier, here it is again .

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @3.1.8    last year

Nah, I’m not going to play this BS ticket game with you.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
4  Buzz of the Orient    last year

Having lived most of my life in Canada I think I have a natural preference for:

  • adherence to a point system for qualification to be a legal immigrant (save for a certain amount of humanitarian refugee permits) strictly enforced. 
  • reasonable limits on campaign funding, campaigns limited to three months, but I think attack ads can boomerang on those who post them, as proven by the Jean Chretien landslide. 
  • Universal single-payer healthcare and generic drugs. In Canada senior citizens puirchase prescription drugs, no matter how expensive, for a small pharmicist dispensing fee only, plus an annual one-time pharmacy registration fee of $100, 
 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
4.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4    last year

All of the above sound better than what we are subjected to now.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
4.2  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @4    last year
generic drugs

One area the US is definitely getting boned on.    We pay more for our meds than most other countries and that has to stop.    But I have news for you.    Right now the US is effectively funding a lot of other countries lower drug costs.   

If and when that stops, drug costs will go up for everywhere else.    No doubt about it.

 
 
 
Krishna
Professor Principal
5  Krishna    last year

This does NOT mean that I do not support making money and profit off of elective, non-essential medical procedures. 

So...who decides what medical procedures are essential...and which are not? You? Me? Donald Trump? AOC? Jared or Ivanka?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Krishna @5    last year

Do you really need that brow lift or that botox injection or that liposuction?

Watch Nip/Tuck sometime (it's on Hulu). They really get into the unnecessariness of certain plastic surgery procedures

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
5.2  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Krishna @5    last year
So...who decides what medical procedures are essential...and which are not?

Those are already pretty well established within the medial community. Commonly known as "elective" surgeries/procedures. Granted, some things will be in a "gray" area that will have to be decided on a case-by-case basis, like a nose job to cure apnea, and that should be decided by a board of professionals within those fields.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
5.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Krishna @5    last year

Elective, non-essential medical procedures (e.g. vanity operations like unnecessary nose jobs) are not covered by Canada's health plan, but I knew a plastic surgeon and he made more money than most doctors. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7  Sparty On    last year

Well, two out for three ain't bad ..... well its really one and two half's.

Full agreement on #1

Partial on #2.   I agree something needs to be done to get lobbyists out of politics as much as possible but a $100 limit?   Sounds low.   I might agree with something more like maybe a $1000.   1000 bucks still buys diddly squat in influence by itself.

Still, i think its much more complicated than just donation limits

Partial on #3

I'm 100% against putting the Government in charge of anything as large as healthcare.   They prove time and time again they can't handle it.   Much smaller things they already manage poorly: USPS ..... the VA ... Social Security ..... etc  

I was in healthcare when the Fed instituted DRG's.   It was a massive clusterfuck.   I believe the answer is cooperative, non bureaucratic co-ownership of it all between the Fed and private industry.   Both sides will have to give, take and cooperate for it to work.   Is that possible?   Yes i think it is but a lot of people would need to put their big boy pants for it to work.

That might not be possible but i am very confident putting it all in the Feds hands is a massive goat rodeo waiting to happen.

 
 
 
Split Personality
PhD Principal
7.1  Split Personality  replied to  Sparty On @7    last year

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.2  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @7    last year
I'm 100% against putting the Government in charge of anything as large as healthcare.

I'm thinking more along the lines of  Government oversight and paying for essential services and staffing, but actual healthcare professionals running the facilities. IOW's, doctors and nurses have free rein to treat the patient as they deem fit, and Uncle Sam pays for it all.  The treatment centers are tracked for how well their success rate is and how they do with patient satisfaction on treatments received.  If they fall below standard metrics established by the medical community, their administrators are replaced by a candidate selected by the government oversight committee composed of healthcare professionals.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.2.1  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @7.2    last year

Pipe dream ime.    I watched a doctor run (via the board of control in the 80’s) hospital get run into the ground and require bankruptcy.

Some of the worse business people I’ve ever seen were doctors and nurses.    Most are great doctors and nurses.    That doesn’t automatically make them good business people.     And a bureaucrat?   Don’t even start.

There isn’t enough money in the world if Docs and the Fed are running things.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.2.2  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @7.2.1    last year
Pipe dream ime.

What you describe sounds more like a lack of training and education. Most hospitals effective are run by Administrators with medical backgrounds aren't they?

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.2.3  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @7.2.2    last year

Not from my experience.    

Most hospital administrators I dealt with had a hospital administration degree.    Effectively a masters in health care administration.

And don’t get me wrong.    Many of them weren’t very impressive either.

Most docs and nurses get very little business training unless they carve out more years to do it. Some do.    Most don’t

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.3  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @7    last year
I agree something needs to be done to get lobbyists out of politics as much as possible but a $100 limit?

The proposed limit is set ridiculously low because even the Poor could scrape that much together if they really want to. This is to ensure that EVERYONE gets represented, not just big money donors. If someone is a big enough ass, enough Poor people will scrape together a $100 bucks each just to make sure he/she knows not to mess with them.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.3.1  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @7.3    last year

No one is stoping the poor from donating what they can right now.   Bernie is proof of that and look where that got him.

It’s naive imo to think that Joe Smuckatelli donating a dollar is going to get noticed as much as even the hundred dollar donor.

Besides the rich bastards will find a way to get our thieves in Congress. They always do.    You’ll have to put full time investigators on every congressperson in order to track it and maybe keep them in check.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.3.3  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @7.3.1    last year

I remember a time when we couldn't travel to the moon, Dick Tracy's talking watch was a fantasy, and the only portable music player was a phonograph player.

See what we can do when we put our minds to it?

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.3.4  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to    last year
just give a 50,000 dollar a month, no show job

A minimum life sentence for bribing an official and a death penalty for accepting a bribe as a public official, should cure that problem!

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.3.5  Sparty On  replied to    last year

Oh yeah, Soros is probably rubbing one off right now at the thought of a Biden presidency.

If he can still rub one off that is

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
7.3.6  Sparty On  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @7.3.3    last year

I admire your confidence in the current system.    Me ..... I admit I’ve been jaded by it.

That seems to happen with time as I was like you not that long ago friend.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
7.3.7  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Sparty On @7.3.6    last year

I'm as jaded as you which is why I proposed that it be the men and women in the trenches making the calls on treatment, I want to eliminate the profit margins and install oversight, not add beucracy to the medical field. Therein lies the problem. You have vastly more experience than I on the caregiving end from the comments you've posted.How would you suggest this could be done in such a way that we do not diminish quality of care or increase wait times for treatment?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
Professor Principal
8  Perrie Halpern R.A.    last year

1)  Illegal Immigration: I am against it, but I do feel that those who are here and didn't just come over the board, should have a pathway to citizenship. 

2) Campaign Funding: I think that there should be a set amount and that corporations have to abide by that set amount which should be no more than a citizen can make. I am also against all PAC's. All of these things take away the power from the people. 

3) Healthcare: I am totally with you. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
9  Jeremy Retired in NC    last year
 1)  Illegal Immigration:

For me, it is pretty simple: As these illegals are rounded up take them to Fort Bragg, NC.  Load them all onto C-130's and C-17's all with T-10D parachutes.  Fly over the border they entered from and out they go.  

It's a win-win.  The 82d Airborne and 173rd Airborne Brigade have Jumpmasters that could training.  As for the Air Force it would help pilots and Loadmasters with their qualifications..

2) Campaign Funding

This is nothing more than LEGALIZED BRIBERY.  For those running for a federal office, they are already have the money.  They want the office, they pay for everything out of their own pockets..

3) Healthcare

There is absolutely no reason medications should be as high as they are.  This is a result of many other issues in the healthcare realm / profession.  While I do think there needs to be far better regulation, the ACA is NOT the answer.  It has added to the problems instead of resolving it.  In a nut shell the government needs to stay the fuck out of it.  They don't know what they are doing and what little they have done was done at their benefit, not ours.

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
9.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @9    last year
There is absolutely no reason medications should be as high as they are.  This is a result of many other issues in the healthcare realm / profession.  While I do think there needs to be far better regulation, the ACA is NOT the answer.  It has added to the problems instead of resolving it.  In a nut shell the government needs to stay the fuck out of it.  They don't know what they are doing and what little they have done was done at their benefit, not ours.

This is my response on this topic I posted earlier. Basically we would be replacing the owners of the facilities (Profiteers) with a non-profit entity (government):

I'm thinking more along the lines of  Government oversight and paying for essential services and staffing, but actual healthcare professionals running the facilities. IOW's, doctors and nurses have free rein to treat the patient as they deem fit, and Uncle Sam pays for it all.  The treatment centers are tracked for how well their success rate is and how they do with patient satisfaction on treatments received.  If they fall below standard metrics established by the medical community, their administrators are replaced by a candidate selected by the government oversight committee composed of healthcare professionals.
 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
9.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @9.1    last year
doctors and nurses have free rein to treat the patient as they deem fit, and Uncle Sam pays for it all.

I would have to ensure there is some kind of audit to keep prices in check.  Nobody from the government.  We see how that corruption works.

The treatment centers are tracked for how well their success rate is and how they do with patient satisfaction on treatments received.  If they fall below standard metrics established by the medical community, their administrators are replaced by a candidate selected by the government oversight committee composed of healthcare professionals.

I did 26 years in the military.  One thing that is done at the leadership levels (Sergeant and above) are annual, documented reviews that are sent and kept on file.  I'd be all for something like that being done.  It would weed out those who do the bare minimum and could be used for promotions into administrative positions and additional training.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
Masters Expert
9.1.2  XDm9mm  replied to  Citizen Kane-473667 @9.1    last year
with a non-profit entity (government)

They might be "non-profit" but that does not mean they won't bleed you dry through corruption.

An honest politician is the definition of an oxymoron.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
9.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @9.1.1    last year

And yet some shitbirds still rise to the top.   Albeit in much smaller percentages.    It’s a great concept and I’m all for it but it still is only as strong as it’s weakest link and if you were in 26 years, you likely had more than one weak link above you in that time.

By the way, respect for making 26 years.    I was ready to get the hell out after one hitch.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
9.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Sparty On @9.1.3    last year
And yet some shitbirds still rise to the top.   Albeit in much smaller percentages.

And they will.  Honestly there is no way to stop every single one of them.  But reality of it is, the result could be a much better system.

By the way, respect for making 26 years.    I was ready to get the hell out after one hitch.

I thought about getting out after one.  Took a serious look at the pros and cons.  Fortunately there were more pros for me.  I learned to actually enjoy being paid to jump from planes so it made it more tolerable.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
Masters Expert
9.3  XDm9mm  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @9    last year
For those running for a federal office, they are already have the money.  They want the office, they pay for everything out of their own pockets.

Not all have the money necessary to run in todays world.  Dan Crenshaw for example.  His NW is estimated to be around $500,000.   Not small potatoes by any stretch but as a former Navy Seal who lost an eye, he's far from the millions people like Pelosi or even Cronyn have. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
9.3.1  Sparty On  replied to  XDm9mm @9.3    last year

I never thought I would say this but I’m all for publicly funded campaigns.    Each candidate gets the same amount from the public coffers based on the level of office they are running for.    Maybe let them match a certain percentage if they want with their own money.

No private donations from any citizen, non citizen or corporation.    For that matter I would get rid of both parties as well.   The DNC and RNC are both a waste of oxygen.    The two highest primary vote getters would run off in the main election.    Regardless of political leanings.

May the best person win regardless.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
9.3.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Sparty On @9.3.1    last year
I never thought I would say this but I’m all for publicly funded campaigns. 

It really is the only way we can have honest politicians who are dedicated to serving the actual voters in their districts/states. I can donate all I want to a candidate, but as soon as Amazon donates $1 million my concerns (and everyone else's) are now at the same priority level as dog shit. 

Maybe let them match a certain percentage if they want with their own money.

Nah, ban that too. Publicly funded 100%, same amount for every candidate. Make them actually have to convince voters rather than outspend their opponent. 

No private donations from any citizen, non citizen or corporation.    For that matter I would get rid of both parties as well.   The DNC and RNC are both a waste of oxygen.    The two highest primary vote getters would run off in the main election.    Regardless of political leanings. May the best person win regardless.

Agree completely on donations. Political parties on the other hand are a little more complicated, but I wouldn't be sad to see both fuck off into oblivion. 

 
 
 
XDm9mm
Masters Expert
10  XDm9mm    last year
     1)  Illegal Immigration: For me, it is pretty simple: It needs to be stopped! While I do agree there are much needed reforms to be made, Open Borders is a non-starter. A secure border is necessary for National Security, Human Rights, and health reasons.

All illegal immigration needs to be stopped.  Illegals already here need to be located and deported.  

    2) Campaign Funding I am against anyone donating more than $100 to a political campaign. Any more than that, and the contribution becomes a bribe IMHO. It is true that this amount will not raise enough money to buy television/print ads, but I believe we can design a system to supply airtime and coverage to everyone running equally.

Simple solution. 

Only RESIDENTS of the DISTRICT a candidate is running for, on both a federal and state basis, can contribute to the candidates election coffers.   NO out of district or corporate contributions permitted.  Limited to not more than $1,000 per resident contributing.   Campaigns can be no longer than 30 days for 'primaries' and no longer than 60 days for general elections.

Only RESIDENTS of the STATE can contribute to the campaign of a candidate for Senator.  NO out of state or corporate contributions permitted.  Limited to not more than $1,000 per resident.  Campaigns can be no longer than 60 days for primaries and 90 days for general elections.

     3) Healthcare I personally find it disgusting that so much of the costs of modern healthcare goes towards corporate profits. The profiteering of pain and misery is an affront to basic morality. I equate it with people who fight dogs or chickens for a living. They too disgust me! This does NOT mean that I do not support making money and profit off of elective, non-essential medical procedures. 

The elephant in the room.   The costs need to be contained and controlled, but they need to be segregated into actual service providers costs and drugs/medications much better.   Provider costs are difficult to regulate as so many variables go into the equations, but it can be accomplished.   Medications are easier but lowering them are also difficult but can be much better controlled if we MAKE THE MEDICATIONS here as opposed to being dependent on foreign nations for them.  We already have experience with 'some' countries providing bad and tainted medications.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
10.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  XDm9mm @10    last year
All illegal immigration needs to be stopped.  Illegals already here need to be located and deported.  

Then who in the fuck is going to pick my fruits and veggies or cut my meat? [removed]

Only RESIDENTS of the DISTRICT a candidate is running for, on both a federal and state basis, can contribute to the candidates election coffers.   NO out of district or corporate contributions permitted.  Limited to not more than $1,000 per resident contributing.   Campaigns can be no longer than 30 days for 'primaries' and no longer than 60 days for general elections. Only RESIDENTS of the STATE can contribute to the campaign of a candidate for Senator.  NO out of state or corporate contributions permitted.  Limited to not more than $1,000 per resident.  Campaigns can be no longer than 60 days for primaries and 90 days for general elections.

Not exactly what I want, but I can totally get behind that. I feel like that would solve a lot of our current issues. Only loophole I see is there is no restriction on personal spending on a campaign. Forbid that and we got a deal. 

The elephant in the room.   The costs need to be contained and controlled, but they need to be segregated into actual service providers costs and drugs/medications much better. 

Every other modern nation on Earth has done it, I say we just copy them. They have already done all the hard work and come up with systems that cost far less and achieve similar results.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.1  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.2    last year
Then who in the fuck is going to pick my fruits and veggies or cut my meat?

People with work visas who want a job. Americans who want a job. Somehow I'm sure you will survive--even if you have to pay a little more.

Forbid that and we got a deal. 

If someone self-finances their campaign, at least in part, why not? Are you afraid voters will be bought off by a few dollars spent on ads?

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
10.2.2  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.1    last year
People with work visas who want a job.

So illegals.

Americans who want a job.

Lol! Oh man, you got jokes.

Somehow I'm sure you will survive--even if you have to pay a little more.

But I don't want to pay more if I don't have to.

If someone self-finances their campaign, at least in part, why not?

Because Jeff Bezos can outspend every mother fucker on the planet and buy himself an office. Spending does make a difference. 

Are you afraid voters will be bought off by a few dollars spent on ads?

Not afraid, convinced. American voters are idiots. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
10.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.2.2    last year
So illegals.

W-h-a-t?? If they have work visas, they aren't here illegally. [removed]

Lol! Oh man, you got jokes.

Not a joke. I know that illegal aliens only account for about half the total farm workforce. That means the rest are made up of legal aliens and American citizens. That's just simple math.

But I don't want to pay more if I don't have to.

Yeah, nobody does. Them's the breaks. I'd like to be able to buy the latest I-phone for less than $700, but they won't sell me one. Oh well.

Because Jeff Bezos can outspend every mother fucker on the planet and buy himself an office.

And yet, he hasn't. And just recently didn't the two richest Democrats running drop out because they knew they didn't stand a chance? Why didn't they simply buy the nomination?

Spending does make a difference. 

It CAN make a difference, but didn't Hillary outspend Trump and still lose?

Not afraid, convinced. American voters are idiots. 

I would say that SOME voters are idiots.

I also think that ALL non-voters who are qualified to vote are idiots.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
10.2.4  Thrawn 31  replied to  Texan1211 @10.2.3    last year
W-h-a-t?? If they have work visas, they aren't here illegally. Do you have any fucking clue how anything at all works?

Most illegals are those who have overstayed their visas. Why replace someone on the line who knows what they are doing becausethey have been here for a year or whatever? 

Not a joke. I know that illegal aliens only account for about half the total farm workforce. That means the rest are made up of legal aliens and American citizens. That's just simple math.

Do you really think you will find enough Americans willing to do the farm work to make up the other 50%? I will tell you right now that I won't, fuck that, will you?

Yeah, nobody does. Them's the breaks. I'd like to be able to buy the latest I-phone for less than $700, but they won't sell me one. Oh well.

Why would you buy the latest iPhone for $700?

And yet, he hasn't. And just recently didn't the two richest Democrats running drop out because they knew they didn't stand a chance? Why didn't they simply buy the nomination?

A) because he obviously doesn't want the job, and b) you are bringing up an entirely different scenario from the hypothetical one we are discussing. 

It CAN make a difference, but didn't Hillary outspend Trump and still lose?

Meh, by 70,000 votes in a few key states, she won the majority of the population by quite a bit.

I would say that SOME voters are idiots. I also think that ALL non-voters who are qualified to vote are idiots.

90% of America is retarded. That is my position and I am sticking by it. 

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
10.2.5  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.2.4    last year
Do you really think you will find enough Americans willing to do the farm work to make up the other 50%?

For tens of  thousands of years we have. Funny how people will do what it takes to eat when they get hungry enough. Remember the crackdown on illegal immigration a few years back when the media was hyping how crops were rotting in the fields and predicting that food prices would shoot through the roof as a result? They didn't. Prices had a very small spike on some items, and some items were in short supply, despite the labor shortage. Want to bet that if we started jailing the farmers hiring illegals they would find a way to fill those vacancies legally?

 
 
 
XDm9mm
Masters Expert
10.2.6  XDm9mm  replied to  Thrawn 31 @10.2.4    last year
90% of America is retarded. That is my position and I am sticking by it. 

Then I'm glad I'm not in that 90% with you.  I enjoy my 10% position.  THANKS!!

 
 
 
Lucifer Morningstar
Professor Guide
11  Lucifer Morningstar    last year

1) Illegal and Ruinous 

2) Incredibly absurd and unconstitutional 

3) Don’t get me started 

 
 
 
Citizen Kane-473667
Professor Guide
11.1  author  Citizen Kane-473667  replied to  Lucifer Morningstar @11    last year

More info please. I'd like to know how you reach those conclusions, and how they can be adapted to achieve the goals we seek; or why we can't.

 
 
 
Thrawn 31
PhD Guide
12  Thrawn 31    last year

1) don't really give a shit, all it means to me is cheaper groceries.

2) all campaigns need to be federally funded at the extact same rate for each candidate who is able to amass signatures that are at least 3% of the states voting population. All private donations, pacs etc should be banned completely. 

3) give me medicare for all. I am already paying twice for healthcare and yet if I were to leave my job my family wouldn't have coverage. At least then I could make a career change and not worry about what we are going to do if one of us gets hurt. Besides, the US spends significantly more for similar or worse results, so whatever. 

 
 
 
Freewill
Junior Participates
12.1  Freewill  replied to  Thrawn 31 @12    last year
3) give me medicare for all. I am already paying twice for healthcare and yet if I were to leave my job my family wouldn't have coverage. At least then I could make a career change and not worry about what we are going to do if one of us gets hurt. Besides, the US spends significantly more for similar or worse results, so whatever.

I'm almost to that point as well.  The middle class is already getting raped on family premiums that exceed our monthly mortgage payment, and we get to enjoy annual double digit premium percentage increases for reduced coverage and even greater max out of pocket risk.  So at this point, even if they triple the take for Medicare in payroll taxes, most in my position will at least not be forced to sacrifice our kid's college education to pay Obamacare premiums plus the big out of pocket deductibles and the ever increasing max out of pocket costs beyond the deductible.  At least here in California that is the case.

If they do go single payer, they will definitely need to come up with something that works better than Medicare though. That program is already not sustainable in its current form.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
Professor Principal
12.1.1  Raven Wing  replied to  Freewill @12.1    last year
At least here in California that is the case.

Not for me here in So Cal. My Plan has no monthly cost, all Tier 1 drugs are no deductible, Doctor and Specialist visits are no deductible, and hospital stays are no deductible and unlimited. That is what my health insurance plan is for 2020. And I have Medicare Complete with HMO.

That may all change next next year, but, that is what it is for me this year.

 
 
 
Kathleen
Professor Principal
13  Kathleen    last year

1. I want secure borders.

2. $100.00 sounds reasonable.

3. My problem is with the insurance company’s making the healthcare decisions instead of the doctor treating you.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


JohnRussell
devangelical
Sparty On
Thomas
Tacos!
Hallux


27 visitors