2020 Democratic Nominee

[bad_teammate 13,196]

16 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

What the fuck are you doing?

Telling Hugo to go fuck himself.

16 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

It’s not working.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

Does anyone here seriously believe that Manning and Assange are criminals worthy of this treatment and intrigue? Does anyone seriously believe it's not VITAL for people to do exactly what Manning and Assange did in taking this kind of information and making sure we could all see it?

I just don't know how much of this is bad faith arguing against a creepy prick like Assange or genuine outrage that our unaccountable mass death war machine was slightly inconvenienced.

Show me the lie.

A journalist encouraging a whistleblower is good. Hell, a journalist even telling a whistleblower how to get the information is good. A journalist HELPING a whistleblower is fine. Gabbard points out the distinction between the necessary legal course while not giving up the actual ethical and moral value of the press exposing government malfeasance.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

Be very wary of Democratic healthcare proposals that are not Medicare 4 All.

‘We’ve done a lot more than you would think’: How the health-insurance industry is working to pull Democrats away from Medicare-for-all (WaPo)

----------------------------------

Facing this threat, some private health companies are mounting a lobbying offensive, sending literature to staff members on Capitol Hill, starting advertising campaigns, and regularly warning politicians, reporters and the public about the dangers of a single-payer system.

These private insurers have pushed for Democrats to instead focus on repairing the Affordable Care Act passed under President Barack Obama, arguing a more incremental approach could include extending health insurance to all Americans without requiring a radical transformation of existing markets.

“These companies completely understand that the federal government can discipline prices, and that doing so could have a fundamental impact on every single thing in their business,” said Harold Pollack, a health-care expert at the University of Chicago, referring to proposals that could set prices or create government programs to compete with private insurers.

------------------------------------

Medicare 4 America is better than the ACA, but any plan that involves private health insurance as anything more than a luxury supplement is designed to continue enriching the private health insurance industry at the expense of the taxpayer's wallet and body.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

lol my god Democrats are stupid

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,463]

Healthcare.gov conveniently kicked us off our private/self-employed insurance today.  Which is nice because my wife is laid up at home with post-delivery complications and a 12-day old infant.  Took her 5 hours to remedy their fuckup.  It would be anecdotal if it hadn't also happened to a few dozen other patients of our delivery hospital under Ambetter insurance.  These are the days!  

We’ve been waiting four months to get our daughter into a pediatric rheumatologist. Thank goodness we aren’t Canadians, amirite?

[Anastasis 23,469]

13 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

We’ve been waiting four months to get our daughter into a pediatric rheumatologist. Thank goodness we aren’t Canadians, amirite?

Access to sub specialist provided care is not going to improve when we adopt a single payer system. Availability will go down, and wait time will go drastically up. It will get worse in the immediate short term, and you will see a longer term impact on the quantity and/or quality of these types of care as well.  This will be most broadly apparent I believe in mental health care.  If we are going to reboot the healthcare financing system, we have to address the mental healthcare delivery system in a meaningful way shortly thereafter. 

Edited April 13, 2019 by Anastasis

[mdmost 43,002]

13 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

lol my god Democrats are stupid

 

Kirsten must've missed the whole Newtown mass shooting where gun owners, NRA members and voters in red or purple or blue states went "meh". 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

27 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Access to sub specialist provided care is not going to improve when we adopt a single payer system. Availability will go down, and wait time will go drastically up.

Only if underfunded, which I'm sure people like you will push for.

Kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, like all conservative interventions into governance these days.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,463]

43 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Access to sub specialist provided care is not going to improve when we adopt a single payer system. Availability will go down, and wait time will go drastically up. It will get worse in the immediate short term, and you will see a longer term impact on the quantity and/or quality of these types of care as well.  This will be most broadly apparent I believe in mental health care.  If we are going to reboot the healthcare financing system, we have to address the mental healthcare delivery system in a meaningful way shortly thereafter. 

As you know I don't think we are a good fit for a true single payer system, and I don't think a democratic country with a market economy can just adopt one outside the context of a national mobilization on war footing. 
The point I'm making is that healthcare consumption in the US isn't price elastic, but the labor supply for speciality care is highly demand elastic. But the buyers are not the consumers and are unable to balance these elements. So the money in the labor force isn't able to flow towards scarcity as efficiently as it would be in a care market (as opposed to a billing management service market collectively bartered with labor), the result is a form of economic rationing, and thus a labor shortage at key points is baked into the system with wait times and geographic distortions being the result. 

There is no perfect system, but ours is the least cost effective, we don't have universal coverage, and we have our own version of wait times. That's the point. 

[Anastasis 23,469]

18 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

As you know I don't think we are a good fit for a true single payer system, and I don't think a democratic country with a market economy can just adopt one outside the context of a national mobilization on war footing. 
The point I'm making is that healthcare consumption in the US isn't price elastic, but the labor supply for speciality care is highly demand elastic. But the buyers are not the consumers and are unable to balance these elements. So the money in the labor force isn't able to flow towards scarcity as efficiently as it would be in a care market (as opposed to a billing management service market collectively bartered with labor), the result is a form of economic rationing, and thus a labor shortage at key points is baked into the system with wait times and geographic distortions being the result. 

There is no perfect system, but ours is the least cost effective, we don't have universal coverage, and we have our own version of wait times. That's the point. 

 

Seriously, would love to get your take on the various Democratic M4A plans.

 

And I sincerely hope that you are able the navigate the necessary care for your daughter man. 

Edited April 13, 2019 by Anastasis

[bad_teammate 13,196]

23 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

As you know I don't think we are a good fit for a true single payer system, and I don't think a democratic country with a market economy can just adopt one outside the context of a national mobilization on war footing.

America 2019: Definitely Not A Nation on War Footing

lol

[bad_teammate 13,196]

womp womp

 

[Patrick Bateman 3,916]

Booker's another candidate I see needing sort of a major event going viral or unbelievable public speech.  He hasn't made any traction either.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Patrick Bateman

[retread 2,951]

Rebecca Buck‏Verified account @RebeccaBuck

Booker campaign isn’t commenting on Newark police prep for 10k people. But campaign aide emphasizes kickoff event was “meant to have a vibe of a hometown BBQ... It’s not meant to be a traditional ‘rally’”

[BradInATX 9,208]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

As you know I don't think we are a good fit for a true single payer system, and I don't think a democratic country with a market economy can just adopt one outside the context of a national mobilization on war footing. 
The point I'm making is that healthcare consumption in the US isn't price elastic, but the labor supply for speciality care is highly demand elastic. But the buyers are not the consumers and are unable to balance these elements. So the money in the labor force isn't able to flow towards scarcity as efficiently as it would be in a care market (as opposed to a billing management service market collectively bartered with labor), the result is a form of economic rationing, and thus a labor shortage at key points is baked into the system with wait times and geographic distortions being the result. 

There is no perfect system, but ours is the least cost effective, we don't have universal coverage, and we have our own version of wait times. That's the point. 

I'm not for full M4A but isn't the fact that care is demand elastic sort of the point? The fact that there is unmet demand for care due to cost is the reason why Sanders et al want M4A and why others want a public option. Instead of being okay with suppressed demand due to cost, shouldn't we work towards workable healthcare for everyone, and addressing the supply side on the back end? 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

"meant to have a vibe of a hometown BBQ... It’s not meant to be a traditional ‘rally’”

[tucker 238]

I was always advised that only so many white people can attend a black bbq so maybe that is why turnout is so low.

[mchookem 16,336]

playing MJ? he didn't get the memo

[bad_teammate 13,196]

1 minute ago, mchookem said:

playing MJ? he didn't get the memo

Playlist:

"Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough" - Michael Jackson

"Ignition - Remix" - R. Kelly

"Chocolate Cake for Breakfast" - Bill Cosby

[Bozo_Casanova 26,463]

 
And I sincerely hope that you are able the navigate the necessary care for your daughter man. 

thank you, I very much appreciate it.

[Bozo_Casanova 26,463]

America 2019: Definitely Not A Nation on War Footing
lol

We haven’t been, at least not in the traditional sense. We haven’t been asked to sacrifice anything (other than our sons and daughters!). We put the rest on the credit card.
This isn’t war footing. This is War as a consumable good. Like Dan Bartlett famously said at about the timing of the case for the Iraq invasion: “you don’t do product launches in August”.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

We haven’t been asked to sacrifice anything (other than our sons and daughters!).

We're sacrificing quite a bit, like any hope for our childrens' futures, our health, and our sanity.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

She was never anywhere on my list, but Gillibrand will not be getting on it.

 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Ugh at that tweet.

And that just illustrates the problem I have with some of my fellow women who are all “I will only consider a woman”.

Except Elizabeth Warren and sometimes Kamala Harris, I find all the other women candidates to be just mealy mouthed and uninspiring or a kook like Tulsi.

I’ll defend all of them against the bullshit double standards and sexist coverage and treatment but they’re not on my top list.

If one of them somehow inexplicably wins the nomination, I’ll support them but I don’t find it likely.

And then their individual failings as candidates become wrapped up in “Why women can’t win” or somesuch crap and it just makes me tired.

A whole crapton of white men failed against Trump in the 2016 Republican primary but were we bombarded with thinkpieces about what their failures meant for every politician that shares their gender?

But that’s what will happen when these wholly uninspiring women lose. And they’ll throw Warren and Harris on that pile even though they’re both head and shoulders above the rest.

Can we just fast forward to November 2020? I don’t know if I have the give a damn to withstand how horrible the next year and a half is going to be.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

lol Cory, come on now

 

[Hank Scorpio 17,729]

 

 

 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Well, that tweet is stupid.

Warren didn’t mention Omar by name and then the Bernie Bro who tweeted it misrepresents what the actual challengers to Bernie actually said and doesn’t say crap about the worst response - Gillibrand (because she’s no threat to Bernie) and doesn’t criticize the other 20 candidates because, again, no threat.

It’s transparent, inaccurate, and not funny.

The left’s ability to make this into a game of “Which Democrats Don’t Say The Right Words Of Support” over directing their scorn at the lunatic who caused this and the list of ALL Republicans who haven’t said one word about Trump’s putting a target on a Congresswoman’s head is just totally on brand.

[Crusher 127]

On ‎4‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 8:37 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

We’ve been waiting four months to get our daughter into a pediatric rheumatologist. Thank goodness we aren’t Canadians, amirite?

Dude , I am so sorry. I never knew that kids could suffer the way we old farts can. I thought it was old fuckers like me. I wish you and your daughter the best on this journey and the best medical care she can receive.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

"Only the left plays silly games."

*posts furiously about Tad Devine, David Sirota, Bernie's taxes, Bernie hiring a DREAMer, and always always about people being mean online -- you know, the real issues*

This is actually a big deal compared to the manufactured controversies you and Hugo had yourselves in a tizzy about. A woman of color, the first black Muslim woman ever to be in Congress, is constantly being threatened with death and the President is signal-boosting those threats and making them worse.

Seeing how the candidate reacts in a moment like this actually tells us about their understanding of what is happening, empathy for the victim, and predisposition to do the right thing. So did the candidate realize that this was about violent racism, show support for the victim, and want to speak out unequivocally about that violent racism.

I think it matters how privileged white men react to threats of violence against a vulnerable black female Muslim colleague.

Beto:

Points out that this is about racist hate, which is good.

Then...

Who is the victim? "Us"
What's the goal of the hateful racism? "drive us apart" and "make us afraid" (This stuff is nonsense; it's literal nonsense)

Those aren't the goals. The goal is to get Ilhan Omar herself harassed into silence or outright killed. Not only is Ilhan Omar not named, she's completely erased from the story and in her place, Beto puts himself (not nearly as bad as Pete straight up making it about himself individually and turning it into a campaign ad, though, at least Beto goes with "we" and "us").

Meanwhile, the very first response, which everyone else should've just copy/pasted...

Bernie

- Center and praise the victim
- Show solidarity with the victim while naming the villain
- Recognize that the danger is to her

A person's immediate response to stress, threat, or tragedy can teach us something.

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,463]

7 hours ago, Crusher said:

Dude , I am so sorry. I never knew that kids could suffer the way we old farts can. I thought it was old fuckers like me. I wish you and your daughter the best on this journey and the best medical care she can receive.

.  Thank you very much. 

[horncyclist 1,387]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Who is the victim? "Us"
What's the goal of the hateful racism? "drive us apart" and "make us afraid" (This stuff is nonsense; it's literal nonsense)

Those aren't the goals. The goal is to get Ilhan Omar herself harassed into silence or outright killed. Not only is Ilhan Omar not named, she's completely erased from the story and in her place, Beto puts himself (not nearly as bad as Pete straight up making it about himself individually and turning it into a campaign ad, though, at least Beto goes with "we" and "us").

The goal is absolutely to drive us apart. Or, more accurately, to use fear to drive people to the polls to vote against candidates they otherwise would support. That's the whole point of these politics. Both responses are correct and Beto in person focused on Omar:

 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

4 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

The goal is absolutely to drive us apart. Or, more accurately, to use fear to drive people to the polls to vote against candidates they otherwise would support. That's the whole point of these politics.

There isn't even an election happening that involves Trump for 19 months. This isn't a campaign strategy.

They do this because they hate women, people of color, and Muslims. Saying that "the whole point" of white supremacist messaging is to drive voting habits is apologia for terrorists. It's whitewashing their intentions, their motives, and their actions.

Is Donald Trump's entire life history of racism a campaign strategy? Was he trying to get votes when he took out a full-page ad calling for the blood of the Central Park Five?

[horncyclist 1,387]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

There isn't even an election happening that involves Trump for 19 months. This isn't a campaign strategy.

They do this because they hate women, people of color, and Muslims. Saying that "the whole point" of white supremacist messaging is to drive voting habits is apologia for terrorists. It's whitewashing their intentions, their motives, and their actions.

Is Donald Trump's entire life history of racism a campaign strategy? Was he trying to get votes when he took out a full-page ad calling for the blood of the Central Park Five?

He can be racist and engaging in these tactics to drive us apart. I think he's primary motive with this is to gin up the base. It's going to continue for the next 19 months. It's who he is. 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

Just now, horncyclist said:

I think he's primary motive with this is to gin up the base. It's going to continue for the next 19 months. It's who he is. 

So he's been running for office his whole life?

[horncyclist 1,387]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

So he's been running for office his whole life?

You don't think this is how he got elected? His first speech was calling Mexicans rapists. The lies and demagoguery is intentional designed to achieve political goals. Do you disagree with me? Is the argument whether Trump is intentionally using racism to gain political support and happens to be a racists, or if he's just a racist and so he can't also consciously act in bad faith? I don't understand the disagreement. God, you can be a beating. 

[bad_teammate 13,196]

9 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

You don't think this is how he got elected? His first speech was calling Mexicans rapists.

Answering the question with a question. #Sad

He got elected (partially) because he is a racist who appeals to racists because he says racist things.

He knows it gets support, but that's not WHY he has the racist views and it's not WHY he expresses the racist views.

He is not tweeting racism thinking, "Oh man, this is going to add 3% to my margin in Ermine, Kentucky!"

Quote

The lies and demagoguery is intentional designed to achieve political goals. Do you disagree with me?

Yes, obviously I disagree. He has been a lying, racist demagogue his whole life. It is not a political design.

Edited April 14, 2019 by bad_teammate

[horncyclist 1,387]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Answering the question with a question. #Sad

He got elected (partially) because he is a racist who appeals to racists because he says racist things.

He knows it gets support, but that's not WHY he has the racist views and it's not WHY he expresses the racist views.

He is not tweeting racism thinking, "Oh man, this is going to add 3% to my margin in Ermine, Kentucky!"

Yes, obviously I disagree. He has been a lying, racist demagogue his whole life. It is not a political design.

I think you're missing my point. What I'm trying to say here and in the demagoguery thread is that Trump is normalizing intentional lies and misrepresentations, including racist ones for political purposes. I think this is happening at a differnt scale than we've ever seen in the past. But I say that taking into account Willie Horton, Birth of a Nation, and on back through history. 

There's a difference between debating whether someone is a racist-- he is-- and debating if he's able to use racism in a new way, or one not seen at this level since Hitler. I'm trying to do the latter, you seem to think it's enough to stop at the former. Is that it? 

I just don't understand what you're trying to do on here. Do you think you're going to bring people to your views by being a dickish contrarian? 

[David Dennison 18,860]

2 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

I think you're missing my point. What I'm trying to say here and in the demagoguery thread is that Trump is normalizing intentional lies and misrepresentations, including racist ones for political purposes. I think this is happening at a differnt scale than we've ever seen in the past. But I say that taking into account Willie Horton, Birth of a Nation, and on back through history. 

There's a difference between debating whether someone is a racist-- he is-- and debating if he's able to use racism in a new way, or one not seen at this level since Hitler. I'm trying to do the latter, you seem to think it's enough to stop at the former. Is that it? 

I just don't understand what you're trying to do on here. Do you think you're going to bring people to your views by being a dickish contrarian? 

The difference is, minorities are much more powerful politically than they were 70 years ago or even 30 years ago. Using racism to rally a shrinking base is a great way to become politically frustrated and you can see this in the way Donald Trump acts. He and his policies are failing and he doesn't know what to do about it other than seeking comfort in a riled up base that isn't large enough to put pressure on Washington to get anything done.

[horncyclist 1,387]

Just now, David Dennison said:

The difference is, minorities are much more powerful politically than they were 70 years ago or even 30 years ago. Using racism to rally a shrinking base is a great way to become politically frustrated and you can see this in the way Donald Trump acts. He and his policies are failing and he doesn't know what to do about it other than seeking comfort in a riled up base that isn't large enough to put pressure on Washington to get anything done.

I hope that's right. It certainly failed in the midterms. I'm going to everything in my power to stand against it. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

12 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

The left’s ability to make this into a game of “Which Democrats Don’t Say The Right Words Of Support” over directing their scorn at the lunatic who caused this and the list of ALL Republicans who haven’t said one word about Trump’s putting a target on a Congresswoman’s head is just totally on brand.

Plus, I think the simple truth is that Omar and AOC pretty much bitch slap the Republicans whenever they whine, so to me its's more an issue of "they can take care of themselves".  They don't need any help or rhetorical prerequisites from their primary opponents. 

And, to an even larger extent, they are smart enough to realize they are picking their own battles.  They seem happy to sleep in the beds they made for themselves.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

1 hour ago, horncyclist said:

I just don't understand what you're trying to do on here.

If by "on here" you mean "this thread", it's not complicated.

The common liberal argument about racists like Donald Trump is that they're doing it to get votes (their "whole point", if you will). The victims of their racism, in this framing, are the Democratic politicians whose power is at risk and the voters (generally white men) who are being manipulated (also a sea of white people). This framing erases the actual victims of the racism from the discussion. It's a way to say, "Hey, don't forget about me."

I am arguing that we need need to use a different frame, one that puts the victims at the center and doesn't dismiss concerns for them as a "leftist purity test" or and over-reliance on "political correctness". I don't like it when victims are removed from the equation. This is why centering/naming Omar is extremely important.

This obviously gets personal because we form personal allegiances to candidates (and personal feelings against candidates), so we feel attacked when our candidate is attacked and validated when our candidate is validated.

 

[henrygandorf 29,191]

both of these are correct, much to the dismay of b_t.

trump is making a personal example out of omar for a larger purpose and to maintain his narrative.  it's all part of the same message he uses to rally his idiots.  his attack is both micro and macro.  he's the president, and he's got the bully pulpit.

some have chosen to take up for her specifically, and some have chosen to engage in a fight they hope will combat the bigger narrative of hate for the eventual greater good of the country.  neither is right or wrong - in fact, they are both absolutely right.  not all candidates are the same and not all citizens are the same.  i wouldn't expect the same response from aoc (who's a personal friend and colleague) that we got from beto (who likely has never met her and has no overlapping personal perspective - white/male vs minority female).  it would be dishonest to say otherwise.

the fact that you want everyone to say the same thing as bernie or they're wrong, is ironically part of the bigger issue you seem to be fighting against.

[bad_teammate 13,196]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

some have chosen to take up for her specifically, and some have chosen to engage in a fight they hope will combat the bigger narrative of hate for the eventual greater good of the country.

How on earth are those two competing concepts?

Erasing the identities and experiences of the victims of racism in favor of "the bigger narrative" completely removes the soul from any argument you might be trying to make.

That's why Pete and Beto updated their talking points on the issue. They understand that.

[henrygandorf 29,191]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How on earth are those two competing concepts?

Erasing the identities and experiences of the victims of racism in favor of "the bigger narrative" completely removes the soul from any argument you might be trying to make.

That's why Pete and Beto updated their talking points on the issue. They understand that.

they're not and i'm not.

once again, you seem to be arguing against several people who are agreeing with you.

this isn't a "competitive victimhood" conversation anymore than it's a "competitive sympathy" competition.

it's gonna be a team effort to take this shit-circus down.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

On 4/11/2019 at 7:37 PM, Lobo said:

Healthcare.gov conveniently kicked us off our private/self-employed insurance today.  Which is nice because my wife is laid up at home with post-delivery complications and a 12-day old infant.  Took her 5 hours to remedy their fuckup.  It would be anecdotal if it hadn't also happened to a few dozen other patients of our delivery hospital under Ambetter insurance.  These are the days!  

Do you have a choice for anything other than ambetter?  It’s complete fucking garbage and most doctors avoid it like the plague.  They pay peanuts and constantly harass for more documentation.  On shit like a $68 follow up visit.  

Theyre the spirit airlines of insurance.  

[Guest Lobo]

Actually, my wife has tolerated it because her GP and OB/GYN and a few other related specialists we've needed over the years have been covered.  And the pediatricians have thusfar been good.  Parts of it certainly remind me of Spirit Airlines, except the premiums and deductibles/out-of-pocket maxes which are quite high for a young family of 4 in relatively good health.  Spirit is

Since the ACA passing, we've also had United (and briefly BC/BS, in some incarnation).  They're all garbage of course from both ends (user and provider).  This selection was really just a function of continuity of care with who we were used to once we learned of second baby's arrival.  I admit our situation is different because while I employ a few people, my mercenary-type role typically requires a self-funded private plan.  Care is good, not great.  And I know the ACA is brought everybody's cost down and I'm just an availability heuristic example to the left and right, but my total out-of-pocket costs each year are far beyond anything the ACA should have foreseen.  You can't talk out of one side of your mouth about the mobile economy, the specialist, the project manager, the dynamic millennial changing jobs or contracts every year, etc.  But then force them into a marketplace where for a young family of 4---they are paying in total $25k/year out of pocket for maybe $5-10k worth of care.  I know, I know...the program is aces for the rest of the country and I'm just some lone outlier.  

Edited April 14, 2019 by Lobo

[David Dennison 18,860]

16 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Actually, my wife has tolerated it because her GP and OB/GYN and a few other related specialists we've needed over the years have been covered.  And the pediatricians have thusfar been good.  Parts of it certainly remind me of Spirit Airlines, except the premiums and deductibles/out-of-pocket maxes which are quite high for a young family of 4 in relatively good health.  Spirit is

Since the ACA passing, we've also had United (and briefly BC/BS, in some incarnation).  They're all garbage of course from both ends (user and provider).  This selection was really just a function of continuity of care with who we were used to once we learned of second baby's arrival.  I admit our situation is different because while I employ a few people, my mercenary-type role typically requires a self-funded private plan.  Care is good, not great.  And I know the ACA is brought everybody's cost down and I'm just an availability heuristic example to the left and right, but my total out-of-pocket costs each year are far beyond anything the ACA should have foreseen.  You can't talk out of one side of your mouth about the mobile economy, the specialist, the project manager, the dynamic millennial changing jobs or contracts every year, etc.  But then force them into a marketplace where for a young family of 4---they are paying in total $25k/year out of pocket for maybe $5-10k worth of care.  I know, I know...the program is aces for the rest of the country and I'm just some lone outlier.  

A lot of us want to eliminate the marketplace completely.

[Guest Lobo]

Doing a bang-up job.  If you want to overhaul Health Care, maybe don't aim for Health Insurance next time.  Big fucking difference that neither Obama nor Trump seems to grasp.  

I sure as shit know the difference between Firestone and Progressive for my car.  I know the difference between Home Depot and AllState for my home.  Why does that delta continue to baffle both sides of the aisle?  

[henrygandorf 29,191]

health insurance companies pay good money to keep the confusion alive.

[David Dennison 18,860]

11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Doing a bang-up job.  If you want to overhaul Health Care, maybe don't aim for Health Insurance next time.  Big fucking difference that neither Obama nor Trump seems to grasp.  

I sure as shit know the difference between Firestone and Progressive for my car.  I know the difference between Home Depot and AllState for my home.  Why does that delta continue to baffle both sides of the aisle?  

Health insurance is part of health care.