Joe Biden is crushing it.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Pretty sure Bernie sees this and knows taxes on the vast amounts or wealth the top .01 have accrude could pay for health care, social programs PLUS infrastructure, etc.

Doesn’t matter. It will never get passed by trying to get the top .01 to pay for it.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Alternatively, we can abandon this insane system of employer sponsored health insurance and come up with something better that works for everyone

I guess we can continue this debate by anecdote.

As you many be aware there are many nurses from Windsor that work in Metro Detroit hospitals. A nurse that I know has a son that is a high level hockey player. He fainted on the bench after a shift and was wisely taken out of the game. He seemed fine but his parents took him to his Canadian GP who felt he likely had just been dehydrated and cleared him to play. The episode repeated itself and this time the GP ordered a heart monitor which showed a sporadic arrhythmia needing specialty evaluation and likely
a cardiac ablation. The closest pediatric cardiologist was in London (Ontario) and the next appointment was in 3 months.

His mother said "no" and having American health insurance was able to make an appointment with a cardiologist at her hospital within a week and the corrective procedure was performed two days after that appointment.

Again, don't assume that trading insurance bureaucrats for government ones will improve anything.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Bcbs is a ppo with high co-pays (usually)... yes it's great. Most can't afford it anymore.
Many/most employers only offer a hmo. Hmo dictates your care.

Blue care network is the hmo option from blue cross.

Not exactly

BCBS is a non-profit mutual insurance company. My small business offers BCBS products to our employees. They offer a wide variety of plans including PPOs (some with very low deductibles) and HMOs. They also provide options for Medicare customers including Medicare Advantage plans.

We have found them easy to work with and I have not heard of any complaints about coverages or denials

PennSpartan wrote:

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Pretty sure Bernie sees this and knows taxes on the vast amounts or wealth the top .01 have accrude could pay for health care, social programs PLUS infrastructure, etc.

Doesn’t matter. It will never get passed by trying to get the top .01 to pay for it.

Let’s break this down to into one simple fact.

You approve of a political system where elected officials are bought and paid for by corporations.

The whole “you can get get in to see a specialist within 24 hours in the US” is a complete bullshit. Sure, sometimes you can. But realistically its pretty much the same as other countries.

RQA wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Alternatively, we can abandon this insane system of employer sponsored health insurance and come up with something better that works for everyone

I guess we can continue this debate by anecdote.

As you many be aware there are many nurses from Windsor that work in Metro Detroit hospitals. A nurse that I know has a son that is a high level hockey player. He fainted on the bench after a shift and was wisely taken out of the game. He seemed fine but his parents took him to his Canadian GP who felt he likely had just been dehydrated and cleared him to play. The episode repeated itself and this time the GP ordered a heart monitor which showed a sporadic arrhythmia needing specialty evaluation and likely
a cardiac ablation. The closest pediatric cardiologist was in London (Ontario) and the next appointment was in 3 months.

His mother said "no" and having American health insurance was able to make an appointment with a cardiologist at her hospital within a week and the corrective procedure was performed two days after that appointment.

Again, don't assume that trading insurance bureaucrats for government ones will improve anything.

To be fair, there are horror stories on both sides of the argument. If the insurance companies wanted to put the idea of universal healthcare behind them for good they would be open and honest with their coverage, and get rid of the fine print. Everyone should know exactly what they’re getting without being an attorney. On the other hand if people are serious about passing Medicare for All then they need to work on both sides of the aisle to get it done. If Dems have learned anything from this legislative session, it’s that compromise is the only way to get bills passed.

kingstonlake wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
Doesn’t matter. It will never get passed by trying to get the top .01 to pay for it.

Let’s break this down to into one simple fact.

You approve of a political system where elected officials are bought and paid for by corporations.

Pretty sure from everything Penn has posted that he believes private industry outcomes are always better than having the government manage things directly. A neoliberal viewpoint all the way.

Trapper Gus wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

Let’s break this down to into one simple fact.

You approve of a political system where elected officials are bought and paid for by corporations.

Pretty sure from everything Penn has posted that he believes private industry outcomes are always better than having the government manage things directly. A neoliberal viewpoint all the way.

You are correct. The government is a bunch of screw ups. Example A is the war in Afghanistan. 20 years and nothing accomplished. And we supposedly have the best military in the world.

PennSpartan wrote:

RQA wrote:

I guess we can continue this debate by anecdote.

As you many be aware there are many nurses from Windsor that work in Metro Detroit hospitals.  A nurse that I know has a son that is a high level hockey player.  He fainted on the bench after a shift and was wisely taken out of the game.  He seemed fine but his parents took him to his Canadian GP who felt he likely had just been dehydrated and cleared him to play.  The episode repeated itself and this time the GP ordered a heart monitor which showed a sporadic arrhythmia needing specialty evaluation and likely
a cardiac ablation.  The closest pediatric cardiologist was in London (Ontario) and the next appointment was in 3 months.

His mother said "no" and having American health insurance was able to make an appointment with a cardiologist at her hospital within a week and the corrective procedure  was performed two days after that appointment.

Again, don't assume that trading insurance bureaucrats for government ones will improve anything.  

To be fair, there are horror stories on both sides of the argument.  If the insurance companies wanted to put the idea of universal healthcare behind them for good they would be open and honest with their coverage, and get rid of the fine print.  Everyone should know exactly what they’re getting without being an attorney.  On the other hand if people are serious about passing Medicare for All then they need to work on both sides of the aisle to get it done.  If Dems have learned anything from this legislative session, it’s that compromise is the only way to get bills passed.

You are ignoring the absolute fact that the Republicans are working the destroy democracy and the former form of the United States government.  What you are promoting is a fantasy.

You are also ignoring the Clinton & Obama administrations trying to execute that fantasy and getting shut down by the Republicans.  Alfer both Clinton and Obama, when the Republicans gained power, they didn't give a flying spaghetti monster about doing anything bipartisan but used the reconciliation loophole and a compliant Senate Parliamentarian to pass what they wanted on partisan votes. (Not to mention the Republicans filibustering all the nominated positions in the Government during Obama, forcing the Democratic Senate to eliminate the filibuster of those to allow them to be filled in order to keep the government running, followed by the Republicans eliminating the filibuster on the Supreme Court Justices so they could pack the court with Right Wing Ideologue Politicians who are now destroying the rule of law)

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
To be fair, there are horror stories on both sides of the argument. If the insurance companies wanted to put the idea of universal healthcare behind them for good they would be open and honest with their coverage, and get rid of the fine print. Everyone should know exactly what they’re getting without being an attorney. On the other hand if people are serious about passing Medicare for All then they need to work on both sides of the aisle to get it done. If Dems have learned anything from this legislative session, it’s that compromise is the only way to get bills passed.

You are ignoring the absolute fact that the Republicans are working the destroy democracy and the former form of the United States government. What you are promoting is a fantasy.

You are also ignoring the Clinton & Obama administrations trying to execute that fantasy and getting shut down by the Republicans. Alfer both Clinton and Obama, when the Republicans gained power, they didn't give a flying spaghetti monster about doing anything bipartisan but used the reconciliation loophole and a compliant Senate Parliamentarian to pass what they wanted on partisan votes.

Thank you for proving my point. Medicare for All will never get done. Now please explain that to the rest of the board Progressives.

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

You are ignoring the absolute fact that the Republicans are working the destroy democracy and the former form of the United States government. What you are promoting is a fantasy.

You are also ignoring the Clinton & Obama administrations trying to execute that fantasy and getting shut down by the Republicans. Alfer both Clinton and Obama, when the Republicans gained power, they didn't give a flying spaghetti monster about doing anything bipartisan but used the reconciliation loophole and a compliant Senate Parliamentarian to pass what they wanted on partisan votes.

Thank you for proving my point. Medicare for All will never get done. Now please explain that to the rest of the board Progressives.

If the Supreme Court rules as expected in the next term the United States as it has existed for all of our lifetimes will no longer exist, and "the people" will have nothing to say about what gets done.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
Thank you for proving my point. Medicare for All will never get done. Now please explain that to the rest of the board Progressives.

If the Supreme Court rules as expected in the next term the United States as it has existed for all of our lifetimes will no longer exist, and "the people" will have nothing to say about what gets done.

Put the pills and gun down and have a cold barley pop. Try to relax.

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Pretty sure from everything Penn has posted that he believes private industry outcomes are always better than having the government manage things directly. A neoliberal viewpoint all the way.

You are correct. The government is a bunch of screw ups. Example A is the war in Afghanistan. 20 years and nothing accomplished. And we supposedly have the best military in the world.

The initial mistake was GW Bush turning what should have been handled in a policing matter into some grand moral crusade, and then taking his eye off the ball because there was more oil in Iraq. Everything after that was CYA by Obama not to be blamed for what was huge mistake on Bush's part. Trump & Biden did the right thing, it would have been better if Obama has done it in 2009, like Biden wanted.

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

If the Supreme Court rules as expected in the next term the United States as it has existed for all of our lifetimes will no longer exist, and "the people" will have nothing to say about what gets done.

Put the pills and gun down and have a cold barley pop. Try to relax.

Why should we relax are we are being raped and pillaged. Fighting back is the only option.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
Put the pills and gun down and have a cold barley pop. Try to relax.

Why should we relax are we are being raped and pillaged. Fighting back is the only option.

Fight the Republicans, not the moderate Democrats.

Can someone explain to my why Biden’s approval rating is higher among people making more than $75,000 a year than among poor progressives who don’t work and smoke weed while vacationing in Cancun all day? I keep hearing he’s failing with people for being to progressive in his policies.

If I didn’t know better he seems to be popular with establishment moderates. Maybe the low thought boomers just keep parroting their single issue angst as if it were true. Basically the same play book as election deniers. Just keep repeating the lie until people believe it’s true.

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Why should we relax are we are being raped and pillaged.  Fighting back is the only option.

Fight the Republicans, not the moderate Democrats.

Fuck it Penn.  

Who do you think we are fighting?

The Democratic Party needs all its troops on the line.  If the moderates want a win in November, they need the progressives to vote.  You can bitch all you want about the progressives being children, that will not get them to the polls, just the opposite in fact.

All voters have to see something they like to motivate them to vote.  That the moderates have lower expectations and are easier to get to the polls is fine, however they cannot win without the progressives, so something that excites progressives has to have been done, which has happened, and it happened because Biden has a much better handle on the politics than you seem to.

It may not be enough, as there is still a feeling among some progressives that the moderates are shitting all over them, so why vote. (So until the election please stop bitching about the progressives, on this board, and in your life, if you want the Democratic candidates to win, and Biden to have two more years of progress)

Furthermore, I have a very bad feeling about what might be happening in the economy, what the Great Britain's Tories setting off a bomb with their "budget" and sounds of "a repeat of 2008" echoing around.  If that happens there will be a Red Wave.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
Fight the Republicans, not the moderate Democrats.

Fuck it Penn.  

Who do you think we are fighting?

The Democratic Party needs all its troops on the line.  If the moderates want a win in November, they need the progressives to vote.  You can bitch all you want about the progressives being children, that will not get them to the polls, just the opposite in fact.

All voters have to see something they like to motivate them to vote.  That the moderates have lower expectations and are easier to get to the polls is fine, however they cannot win without the progressives, so something that excites progressives has to have been done, which has happened, and it happened because Biden has a much better handle on the politics than you seem to.

It may not be enough, as there is still a feeling among some progressives that the moderates are shitting all over them, so why vote. (So until the election please stop bitching about the progressives, on this board, and in your life, if you want the Democratic candidates to win, and Biden to have two more years of progress)

Furthermore, I have a very bad feeling about what might be happening in the economy, what the Great Britain's Tories setting off a bomb with their "budget" and sounds of "a repeat of 2008" echoing around.  If that happens there will be a Red Wave.

The Progressives have been given plenty in the first two years of this administration. If they don’t vote, it’s on them.

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Fuck it Penn.  

Who do you think we are fighting?

The Democratic Party needs all its troops on the line.  If the moderates want a win in November, they need the progressives to vote.  You can bitch all you want about the progressives being children, that will not get them to the polls, just the opposite in fact.

All voters have to see something they like to motivate them to vote.  That the moderates have lower expectations and are easier to get to the polls is fine, however they cannot win without the progressives, so something that excites progressives has to have been done, which has happened, and it happened because Biden has a much better handle on the politics than you seem to.

It may not be enough, as there is still a feeling among some progressives that the moderates are shitting all over them, so why vote. (So until the election please stop bitching about the progressives, on this board, and in your life, if you want the Democratic candidates to win, and Biden to have two more years of progress)

Furthermore, I have a very bad feeling about what might be happening in the economy, what the Great Britain's Tories setting off a bomb with their "budget" and sounds of "a repeat of 2008" echoing around.  If that happens there will be a Red Wave.

The Progressives have been given plenty in the first two years of this administration. If they don’t vote, it’s on them.

Yelling at them doesn't work, Penn. You need to do what you can to get them to the polls.

Trapper. You’re arguing with someone who spends more time fighting his own party than the other party. He’s more pissed off about a one time $10,000 loan being forgiven than the idea of the other party ending his right to a free and fair election. A party who literally tried a coup against democracy on two proven occasions.
A guy who said he’d vote for their leader over a democrat he disagrees with.
He’s worse than them. He’s one who pretends to be one of “you” while working against you.
He’s a lost cause. Fuck him.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
The Progressives have been given plenty in the first two years of this administration. If they don’t vote, it’s on them.

Yelling at them doesn't work, Penn. You need to do what you can to get them to the polls.

I’m an old man. They should be driving me to the polls!

Joe pulls out that big pen again and restores civility.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/joe-biden-signs-order-relaunching-212006027.html

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Yelling at them doesn't work, Penn.  You need to do what you can to get them to the polls.

I’m an old man.  They should be driving me to the polls!

lol - sadly you haven't gained enough wisdom with age ... such as how to manipulate people to be on your side ... it is a good thing that Biden is older than either of us.

This is the problem. Progressives. LOL:

https://www.dailydot.com/irl/forced-to-come-in-to-empty-office/?amp

PennSpartan wrote:This is the problem. Progressives. LOL:

https://www.dailydot.com/irl/forced-to-come-in-to-empty-office/?amp

While I agree the conflict between manamgment & emplyees is a problem it might not be what management thinks it is, to quote the article linked -

During the COVID-19 pandemic, government-implemented stay-at-home and social distancing mandates forced many companies to adjust their operations to accommodate work-from-home models. And according to several studies, these transitions ultimately ended up positively affecting businesses’ bottom lines. Remote employees ended up being more productive and were happier with their jobs, which culminated in lower turnover rates and higher profits/efficacy per worker. On top of that, businesses ended up saving a ton of money in overhead costs.

It is unclear why management wants to lower productivity, but there it is.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:Remember phones had those circle things for the numbers? Yeah, the good old days.

My mother had a rotary dialed phone in her house up until the day we moved her to assisted living, in 2005. A Western Electric phone that was installed in 1962.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:This is the problem. Progressives. LOL:

https://www.dailydot.com/irl/forced-to-come-in-to-empty-office/?amp

While I agree the conflict between manamgment & emplyees is a problem it might not be what management thinks it is, to quote the article linked -

During the COVID-19 pandemic, government-implemented stay-at-home and social distancing mandates forced many companies to adjust their operations to accommodate work-from-home models. And according to several studies, these transitions ultimately ended up positively affecting businesses’ bottom lines. Remote employees ended up being more productive and were happier with their jobs, which culminated in lower turnover rates and higher profits/efficacy per worker. On top of that, businesses ended up saving a ton of money in overhead costs.

It is unclear why management wants to lower productivity, but there it is.

If I’m a waitress, can I work from home?
If I’m an assembly line worker, can I work from home?

If I’m a plumber, can I work from home?

If I’m an electrician, can I work from home?

If I’m a Surgeon, can I work from home?

If I’m an airline pilot, can I work from home?

PennSpartan wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

While I agree the conflict between manamgment & emplyees is a problem it might not be what management thinks it is, to quote the article linked -



It is unclear why management wants to lower productivity, but there it is.

If I’m a waitress, can I work from home?
If I’m an assembly line worker, can I work from home?

Okay, what does that have to do with all the workers who can work from home, which is what the article linked is about?

All of the workers you are rattling off don't work in an office at all, unless it is someone else's office that they are wiring, plumbing, or serving food in.

Trapper Gus wrote:

PennSpartan wrote:
If I’m a waitress, can I work from home?
If I’m an assembly line worker, can I work from home?

Okay, what does that have to do with all the workers who can work from home, which is what the article linked is about?

Because they are lazy fucks who should be fired. They certainly don’t deserve student debt relief, since they are saving money by working in their pajamas.

It amazes me that people see PROGRESS as a bad thing.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:So this is some sort of fairness issue to you?

Maybe we should all be paid the same too, you socialist.

Maybe he is back on his generational divide thing.

Any rational manager, one not on a power trip, would look at increased productivity and start looking at downsizing the office space.

It's not like this is a new thing, many of the people we call for service, such as to get our phones fixed, or our cable repaired, are working from home and have been for 10 years or more.

Motown Spartan wrote:It amazes me that people see PROGRESS as a bad thing.

Working from home is progress? Then don’t ever ask for paid daycare again.