Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

37 minutes ago, Xian said:

Warren and Medicare for all is actually growing on me, but a few questions. 
 

what happens to people who work and invested in the insurance companies?  Do they just lose their job/investment?    While that would suck for them, I hope we don’t waste tax dollars on artificially propping up a soon to be redundant industry.
to counteract this?

Warren is on cnn right now speaking about how the health insurance employees can shift to other insurance jobs like car or life.  I guess she thinks Blue Cross can shift their employees to their auto insurance division.  Roll eyes.  And I didn’t realize those industries have so many open jobs to absorb a completely different industry  

i don’t think Medicare for all is necessary a bad idea in the long run but even Warren doesn’t know how it could be funded or work. But even this idea is really just a symptom of a larger problem that more and more Americans cannot afford basic life services. 

[GSU&UT 1,798]

9 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Many health insurance companies are not for profit. I’m sure they have highly compensated employees but they don’t have owners or shareholders.  All “profit” is put back into the company which keep costs lower.

i agree drug companies can be a problem but it’s also a false claim that the US can pay what other countries pay. If that is forced, the next generation of new drugs will never be produced.  I agree that it sucks that the US subsidize the rest (most) of the world when it comes to pharmaceuticals.  Make a law that they can’t charge a US patient more than X percent of the average of the rest of the world. It would lower our drug costs while raising the rest of the worlds cost.
 

You realize that so much of drug research is already heavily subsidized by our government right?

https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/YourMoney/story?id=129651

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20170602.060376/full/

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

1 minute ago, GSU&UT said:

You realize that so much of drug research is already heavily subsidized by our government right?

https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/YourMoney/story?id=129651

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20170602.060376/full/

How much as percent of total bring-to-market costs does the govt fund?  Your article doesn’t cover that?  I don’t mean for one drug, but for all including drugs that end up not being feasible?

[GSU&UT 1,798]

3 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

How much as percent of total bring-to-market costs does the govt fund?  Your article doesn’t cover that?  I don’t mean for one drug, but for all including drugs that end up not being feasible?

Look at the second article, you are straight up using an argument that pharmaceutical companies have put out to scare people into not supporting government run healthcare. I don't even know if there's any one study that gives you a nice number of how much money is wasted researching dead-end drugs, but I sure as hell am not going to trust a pharma company to give me an accurate number.

Quote

The $76 billion in research and development that pharmaceutical companies claim overlooks the ways that US employers and taxpayers pay for at least 44 percent of total corporate research and development through tax subsidies and credits. If one adds the taxes not paid when companies park tens of billions in foreign tax havens, most of the high risk and cost of pharmaceutical research is actually borne by taxpayers, not the companies. And this does not take into account the billions in research conducted by the National Institutes of Health, other government agencies, foundations, and charities.

I'm also not about to really have sympathy for pharmaceutical company execs that knowingly contributed to the opioid crisis while making record profits. They can threaten to take their ball and go home, I'm sure they'll just intentionally grind research to a halt.

Edited November 1, 2019 by GSU&UT

[henrygandorf 29,174]

15 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Warren is on cnn right now speaking about how the health insurance employees can shift to other insurance jobs like car or life.  I guess she thinks Blue Cross can shift their employees to their auto insurance division.  Roll eyes.  And I didn’t realize those industries have so many open jobs to absorb a completely different industry  

blue cross employees can just walk across the hall and work for red cross.  it's not that hard.

[Anastasis 23,375]

Everybody on CNBC hates Warren today. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

If Medicare for All is the ultimate goal, it would be better to phase it in over a longer period, than Warren is suggesting, by continually lowering the eligibility age. I think insurance companies, employers and younger people could get onboard with saying that older employees would slowly get pulled out of the private insurance market.  Older insured people are the ones who use health insurance the most.  Move them out of the health insurance market and costs for younger people would dramatically drop. 

Of course the problem with this method is who's paying for these new Medicare recipients? The only answer is taxpayers. And you can't ask poor or middle class people to pay.  They ain't got nothing to pay.  It will have to be funded by people making 100K or more.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

If Medicare for All is the ultimate goal, it would be better to phase it in over a longer period, than Warren is suggesting, by continually lowering the eligibility age. I think insurance companies, employers and younger people could get onboard with saying that older employees would slowly get pulled out of the private insurance market.  Older insured people are the ones who use health insurance the most.  Move them out of the health insurance market and costs for younger people would dramatically drop. 

Of course the problem with this method is who's paying for these new Medicare recipients? The only answer is taxpayers. And you can't ask poor or middle class people to pay.  They ain't got nothing to pay.  It will have to be funded by people making 100K or more.

 

$100k is not living large.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

$100k is not living large.

I don't disagree especially in many areas of the country or practically in any major city.  But the 100K salary person has more disposable income than the person on the lower end of middle class earning 45K.

But continuing on criticism on how Warren is handling Medicare for All, her plan is not much more than a tagline. I believe that Warren is extremely smart so why isn't there an in-depth plan for M4A?  Makes me wonder if she knows it wouldn't work, or that it would be politically a bad idea to produce that plan.

[bad_teammate 13,125]

57 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Many health insurance companies are not for profit. I’m sure they have highly compensated employees but they don’t have owners or shareholders.  All “profit” is put back into the company which keep costs lower.

mmmmm corporate propaganda

And how many Americans are covered by these non-profits? ~10%?

Quote

i agree drug companies can be a problem but it’s also a false claim that the US can pay what other countries pay. If that is forced, the next generation of new drugs will never be produced.

More garbage propaganda. We pay for it collectively. They spend more on advertising and marketing than they do on R&D.

12 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I think insurance companies, employers and younger people could get onboard with saying that older employees would slowly get pulled out of the private insurance market.

You think the insurance companies are going to get onboard with a plan that destroys their business? lol get the hell out of here

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,356]

 

[Anastasis 23,375]

13 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't disagree especially in many areas of the country or practically in any major city.  But the 100K salary person has more disposable income than the person on the lower end of middle class earning 45K.

100k household income is lower middle class for an average size family. 

[bad_teammate 13,125]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

100k household income is lower middle class for an average size family. 

ehhhhhh

More upper middle or strong middle. Definitely not lower middle.

 

[Anastasis 23,375]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

ehhhhhh

More upper middle or strong middle. Definitely not lower middle.

These class definitions based on distributional income analyses are always broken. $25k for a family of three is just barely above poverty level per the federal definitions. And well below any realistic threshold for the middle class. 

[DaysOff 7,821]

Yes.
We need to federally ban at-will employment and dramatically increase unionizing. We need more strikes and more collective bargaining.
 

I could really use the time off.

[Anastasis 23,375]

According to next pundit on CNBC Warren may just be a buying opportunity. 

[Hiphopopotamos 20,865]

25 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't disagree especially in many areas of the country or practically in any major city.  But the 100K salary person has more disposable income than the person on the lower end of middle class earning 45K.

But continuing on criticism on how Warren is handling Medicare for All, her plan is not much more than a tagline. I believe that Warren is extremely smart so why isn't there an in-depth plan for M4A?  Makes me wonder if she knows it wouldn't work, or that it would be politically a bad idea to produce that plan.

Why does it need to be?  What do you think is the percentage of voters that actually care and can understand how M4A is going to be paid for?  We just saw a guy who couldn't speak in complete sentences get elected President by a country of morons - but we need Warren to fully flesh out the economics of Medicare 4 All to win?  I just don't see it really mattering come election day.

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

29 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't disagree especially in many areas of the country or practically in any major city.  But the 100K salary person has more disposable income than the person on the lower end of middle class earning 45K.

But continuing on criticism on how Warren is handling Medicare for All, her plan is not much more than a tagline. I believe that Warren is extremely smart so why isn't there an in-depth plan for M4A?  Makes me wonder if she knows it wouldn't work, or that it would be politically a bad idea to produce that plan.

I'm most impressed by Mrs. Warren over any of the other democrat nominees, that she doesn't have a plan is a red flag IMO.  She's a plan wonk in my mind so I'd think she'd have something more worked out.  

I've been most impressed by her comments regarding Wall Street/financial reform, but that's not going to be enough to get her the WH, even though it's really long overdue.

[bad_teammate 13,125]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

These class definitions based on distributional income analyses are always broken. $25k for a family of three is just barely above poverty level per the federal definitions. And well below any realistic threshold for the middle class.

How is that "broken" if it's an accurate reflection of the economic reality of America's working classes?

It's like saying the actual problem with a fever is the thermometer.

Also, wouldn't beat at/near poverty be the very definition of "lower" class?

[Anastasis 23,375]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

How is that "broken" if it's an accurate reflection of the economic reality of America's working classes?

It's like saying the actual problem with a fever is the thermometer.

Also, wouldn't beat at/near poverty be the very definition of "lower" class?

It's broken because the middle class is not defined by the income distribution. The middle class is defined based on reference to a set of common lifestyle characteristics associated with a particular socioeconomic segment of the population. I would define middle class based on ability to access home ownership, security wrt basic human needs including food and healthcare, access to education, the ability to save for retirement, some level of disposable income, and the ability to engage in recreation and leisure activities.  That is what defined the American middle class in the recent past, and what most of us thing about when we think about a middle class lifestyle.  Of course, within that segment there is a range from lower to upper, but this SES segment is generally more similar than dissimilar in whole, and in particular when contrasted to the lower class who lack many/most of these characteristics.

The fundamental problem is that the middle class is increasingly unattainable for most Americans, without regard to where they fall on the meat of the income distribution.  A family of 3 with a household income of 100k, it ain't happening. If we look at income distribution, middle income ranges from 30k to 110k household (25th-75th percentiles).  The lower end is basically poverty level, the upper end is a real stretch to call middle class if you accept something close to my definition above.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

I like Warren on many issues but her campaign seems to be putting everything on M4A so it would be her main legislative priority if elected. I think that would ruin American healthcare so I would vote for anyone over her. Perhaps even to a point that I would rather see another 4 years of Trump as President over M4A. And I hate Trump. not sure I could vote for Trump but I prefer him over M4A.

[bad_teammate 13,125]

10 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I like Warren on many issues but her campaign seems to be putting everything on M4A so it would be her main legislative priority if elected. I think that would ruin American healthcare so I would vote for anyone over her. Perhaps even to a point that I would rather see another 4 years of Trump as President over M4A. And I hate Trump. not sure I could vote for Trump but I prefer him over M4A.

It's going to be hilarious when Trump annihilates Pete in the general and the entire media class does 11/2016 "OH MY GOD WHAT HAPPENED!?!?" Redux.

Elite/Media Class: "I guess Americans are just too racist sexist homophobic."
Left: "We need to appeal to the material interests of the working class."
Elite/Media Class: "Wow, that's really racist sexist homophobic of you."

Centrists and liberals, these are the people you're tying yourself into knots trying to convince. They're never going to betray their class interests. They would literally rather see ethnic cleansing on our Southern border than an 8% rise in their income taxes.

Your hope is the youth and working classes. That's it. Figure out who the youth and working classes are enthusiastic for and throw your support behind that candidate/those candidates.

[Bruh Man 3,160]

Yeah I'm really curious how she plans to stop companies from hiring contractors to avoid the tax....any ideas?

[Bruh Man 3,160]

34 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I like Warren on many issues but her campaign seems to be putting everything on M4A so it would be her main legislative priority if elected. I think that would ruin American healthcare so I would vote for anyone over her. Perhaps even to a point that I would rather see another 4 years of Trump as President over M4A. And I hate Trump. not sure I could vote for Trump but I prefer him over M4A.

Her main legislative priority is her anti-corruption. She's on the record many times about it. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

8 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Yeah I'm really curious how she plans to stop companies from hiring contractors to avoid the tax....any ideas?

The contractor vs. employer regulations in wage and hour and tax are pretty robust.  You can't just call someone a contractor and boom they are a contractor.  If they are treated like an employee, then they are an employee, and Dept. of Labor or IRS will relatively easily establish that a contractor is really an employee and at that point you get slammed for back taxes and benefits. 

The reason this doesn't happen more often is that many "independent contractors" like being contractors and don't complain. 

 

 

[henrygandorf 29,174]

27 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

It's going to be hilarious when Trump annihilates Pete in the general and the entire media class does 11/2016 "OH MY GOD WHAT HAPPENED!?!?" Redux.

Elite/Media Class: "I guess Americans are just too racist sexist homophobic."
Left: "We need to appeal to the material interests of the working class."
Elite/Media Class: "Wow, that's really racist sexist homophobic of you."

Centrists and liberals, these are the people you're tying yourself into knots trying to convince. They're never going to betray their class interests. They would literally rather see ethnic cleansing on our Southern border than an 8% rise in their income taxes.

Your hope is the youth and working classes. That's it. Figure out who the youth and working classes are enthusiastic for and throw your support behind that candidate/those candidates.

bt: get involved.  get informed.  figure out who represents your values.  do your own research.  just find out who the young people like and like that person.

[406W30th 1,111]

1 hour ago, DaysOff said:

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Yes.
We need to federally ban at-will employment and dramatically increase unionizing. We need more strikes and more collective bargaining
 

I could really use the time off.

Username checks out

[Bruh Man 3,160]

12 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

The contractor vs. employer regulations in wage and hour and tax are pretty robust.  You can't just call someone a contractor and boom they are a contractor.  If they are treated like an employee, then they are an employee, and Dept. of Labor or IRS will relatively easily establish that a contractor is really an employee and at that point you get slammed for back taxes and benefits. 

The reason this doesn't happen more often is that many "independent contractors" like being contractors and don't complain. 

 

 

Is the govt really enforcing the labor laws tho? 

A friend of mine works for a state agency in a legal department and they're all hired as contractors to avoid pesky things like health insurance and other benefits. Let that sink in.. it's a govt agency gaming the system on their own legal staff.

I also have a few friends in the restaurants biz that prefer paying the fine/fee instead of giving their employees health insurance. I'm not sure if the fine/fee makes up for the cost of their employees not having health insurance to the state but I sincerely doubt it. 

Like you said there are laws on the books about this stuff but I don't think they're strictly enforced. With the payroll tax method you don't have to worry about this because you get taxed regardless the designation of the employee.

I love Warren and will vote for her I'm just playing devil's advocate here because I legitimately don't know if employers could game this part of her plan. 

Edited November 1, 2019 by Bruh Man

[tantric superman 4,667]

These laws can generally be enforced by both govt. agencies as well as private attorneys.  If whole industries are making wholesale decisions to avoid taxation or the proper paying of wages and benefits, someone will bring suit, especially if there is union pressure and movement by state regulators to stop large scale fraud. 

I can't speak to public employers and regulations which may be different for them.

[bad_teammate 13,125]

11 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

bt: get involved.  get informed.  figure out who represents your values.  do your own research.  just find out who the young people like and like that person.

I should've prefaced...

--------------------
If you actually want guaranteed healthcare to 100% of Americans and a redistribution of wealth that is more equitable for all Americans, your hope is the youth and working classes. That's it. Figure out who the youth and working classes are enthusiastic for and throw your support behind that candidate/those candidates.

If all you want is a nicer shade of blue on the boot stomping on the face of the poor, then the centrists are a great option.
-----------------------

[Lagunamadre 1,975]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I like Warren on many issues but her campaign seems to be putting everything on M4A so it would be her main legislative priority if elected. I think that would ruin American healthcare so I would vote for anyone over her. Perhaps even to a point that I would rather see another 4 years of Trump as President over M4A. And I hate Trump. not sure I could vote for Trump but I prefer him over M4A.

Same on her stance on banning fracking. Which would obviously destroy my industry and my city (Houston). I'm convinced it's just rhetoric akin to Republicans running on a banning abortion platform, but scary enough to probably take somewhat seriously, especially on federal lands. I'm going to be pissed if the Dems end up choosing Warren or Bernie, I think they are the only two that Trump could beat in the general just because they are too far out of the mainstream for the average American.  

[zork 629]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

The angry librarian telling Joe where to go.

[tantric superman 4,667]

Trump's a vile spawn of Satan, so to me, that is just a tad more out of the mainstream than a progressive wannabe swinging for the fences.

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Yeah it says A LOT that we’re all fine with the ridiculous thinking that a leftist who advocates for banning fracking and government health care for everyone is more out of step with “average Americans” (whatever the fuck they are) than an sexist racist insane predatory authoritarian.

 

Stop saying that bullshittery.

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

On 10/31/2019 at 2:13 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Wolf disagrees with idea of sheepdog to protect sheep. 

Definitely a wolf.

 

[Anastasis 23,375]

7 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Yeah it says A LOT that we’re all fine with the ridiculous thinking that a leftist who advocates for banning fracking and government health care for everyone is more out of step with “average Americans” (whatever the fuck they are) than an sexist racist insane predatory authoritarian.

Pendulums. How do they work?

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

57 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Yeah I'm really curious how she plans to stop companies from hiring contractors to avoid the tax....any ideas?

Dog and Broom Death squads.  

Worked for Peter the Great (that whole Hilter and or Putin thing has been soooo overplayed).

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

13 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Yeah it says A LOT that we’re all fine with the ridiculous thinking that a leftist who advocates for banning fracking and government health care for everyone is more out of step with “average Americans” (whatever the fuck they are) than an sexist racist insane predatory authoritarian.

 

Stop saying that bullshittery.

Why does it have to be one or the other? Can't both be wrong?

[bad_teammate 13,125]

5 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Why does it have to be one or the other? Can't both be wrong?

Left: Save human civilization as much as possible from climate change, guarantee health care to everyone
Right: Sacrifice human civilization for the increasingly sratified profits of people who can afford to insulate themselves from the effects of climate change, keep millions without adequate care and tens of thousands dead every year from preventable causes.

WHY CAN'T THEY BOTH BE WRONG!?!?!?!? lol

Absolutely, 100% useless.

[CO Horn 154]

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

The contractor vs. employer regulations in wage and hour and tax are pretty robust.  You can't just call someone a contractor and boom they are a contractor.  If they are treated like an employee, then they are an employee, and Dept. of Labor or IRS will relatively easily establish that a contractor is really an employee and at that point you get slammed for back taxes and benefits. 

The reason this doesn't happen more often is that many "independent contractors" like being contractors and don't complain. 

 

 

I should go to law school and become a labor law attorney.  I'd be a billionaire within a week if companies were to attempt this.

[bad_teammate 13,125]

It sucks that Warren let the media bully her with right-wing talking points into using a dumb funding mechanism to avoid the right-wing smear attacks perpetuated by the supposedly-liberal media (which is really just a mouthpiece for the elite wealth class).

It's awesome that she didn't let them bully her out of single-payer, though.

Gives me hope. Let's get this bread.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

7 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Left: Save human civilization as much as possible from climate change, guarantee health care to everyone
Right: Sacrifice human civilization for the increasingly sratified profits of people who can afford to insulate themselves from the effects of climate change, keep millions without adequate care and tens of thousands dead every year from preventable causes.

WHY CAN'T THEY BOTH BE WRONG!?!?!?!? lol

Absolutely, 100% useless.

Is someone supposed to understand what you’re talking about?  Tone isn’t easy to read so maybe you are trying to communicate something that is being lost. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

Why does it have to be one or the other? Can't both be wrong?

Because the assertion - as laid out - is actually a binary choice.

Elizabeth Warren or Donald Trump.

“I’m afraid ‘average Americans’ will find Warren too far out there so they’ll stick with a racist fascist sexist wannabe dictator.”

And I don’t think that’s true at all and it’s stupid to repeat that kind of internet poisoned punditry.

And to even suggest banning fracking and M4A is somehow equal on the “Can’t both be bad” scale to putting kids in cages and abuse of power and strong arming foreign governments for political gain is ......... the most Republican Convert garbage I’ve ever heard.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

21 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

Because the assertion - as laid out - is actually a binary choice.

Elizabeth Warren or Donald Trump.

“I’m afraid ‘average Americans’ will find Warren too far out there so they’ll stick with a racist fascist sexist wannabe dictator.”

And I don’t think that’s true at all and it’s stupid to repeat that kind of internet poisoned punditry.

And to even suggest banning fracking and M4A is somehow equal on the “Can’t both be bad” scale to putting kids in cages and abuse of power and strong arming foreign governments for political gain is ......... the most Republican Convert garbage I’ve ever heard.

 

I hear you but I think that the Democrats are setting themselves up for a mistake if they go so far Left that many in the center decide to sit out the election because they see no one that represents them.  If they think that nominating an extreme progressive will cast a wide net, they could very well be disappointed and miss a relatively easy opportunity.   

[babysdaddy 2,711]

If she's the nominee and she doesn't figure out how to moderate some proposals we're going to get 4 more years of Trump. 

To quote Marlo "You want it to be one way.....but it's the other way".

[henrygandorf 29,174]

8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I hear you but I think that the Democrats are setting themselves up for a mistake if they go so far Left that many in the center decide to sit out the election because they see no one that represents them.  If they think that nominating an extreme progressive will cast a wide net, they could very well be disappointed and miss a relatively easy opportunity.   

while history may have shown this in the past, and many on the right are i'm sure hoping for this, i just don't see people sitting out an election with donald trump on the ballot.

people will run to the box to vote against him like he's hillary fucking clinton.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,391]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

while history may have shown this in the past, and many on the right are i'm sure hoping for this, i just don't see people sitting out an election with donald trump on the ballot.

people will run to the box to vote against him like he's hillary fucking clinton.

Assuming this is true, the best strategy is nominate a centrist not a progressive.  You want a progressive when the issues are the deciding factors. When the deciding factor are the people, you want someone and their stance to be as plain as possible.

[GSU&UT 1,798]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Pendulums. How do they work?

This swing of the pendulum has been building since Reagan.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

It's incredible that 30 years of centrist Dems leads to Trump, who steals the Midwest with a populist message, and some people still think more centrist Dems is the answer. 

[6th Street 6,340]

6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's incredible that 30 years of centrist Dems leads to Trump, who steals the Midwest with a populist message, and some people still think more centrist Dems is the answer. 

Voter apathy and a terrible Democrat candidate handed Trump the Midwest