Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

HR_Poke

Crowley unseated in NYC

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, NVGiant said:

LOL. And here comes the left-wing populism. Yay. 

I know right?  phuck....  Reap what you sow i guess....  I'm moving to New Zealand....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

I know right?  phuck....  Reap what you sow i guess....  I'm moving to New Zealand....

Shit. @mugtangand I have been shopping for property down there for years. Now we're going to have to find a bigger house. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, nocoolnamejim said:

I wish it wasn't just one side of the political spectrum that was required to explain how they're going to pay for everything they want to do.

Which side would that be? I'm not seeing any of that...

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

http://www.businessinsider.com/all-about-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-who-beat-crowley-in-ny-dem-primary-2018-6

Her platform is incredibly naive...  How the hell are we supposed to pay for all that?  Unicorns and rainbows?  I just don't get the millennial obsession with socialism...

 

DgqWsjSWAAU7NiO.jpg

Given the traction Sanders got, not really a surprise

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep seeing stupid MSM articles on how Crowley's loss to "open Socialist" Ocaisio-Cortez is somehow some kind of Trump-related thing, because Crowley was a big Trump Critic in the House. This is complete crap; no way is Ocaisio-Cortez going to be ANY less anti-Trump than Crowley. Stupid articles!

What it IS really about is a shift from Blue Dog - Centrist Dems toward Progressive Socialists, a long brewing Democratic Party Civil War that really came onto the national scene with Bernie Sanders' candidacy. In highly-Democratic skewed urban districts now, there is more support for Progressives than for Moderate candidates, similar to the way Tea Partiers won GOP Seats in recent cycles in mostly rural-suburban districts.

The question is whether this movement is going to alter the overall direction of the Democratic Party, and move it even further Left than it already is. For national elections, and 2020, the Establishment Democrats have to be worried that a shift too far to the Left may put 2020 out of reach for wooing Independents and Conservative Democrats.

It's a Democratic Seat either way, so zero effect on the 2018 situation, but a sign that 2020 might get a bit more interesting.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

guaranteed jobs and free college for everyone!  you get a job!  you get a job! everyone gets a job!!!

PAID FOR BY OPRAH FOR PRESIDENT 2020

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Which side would that be? I'm not seeing any of that...

Well, for example, the giant tax cut that was passed this year. "How are we supposed to pay for all of that?" should apply to that too I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pokebball said:

Given the traction Sanders got, not really a surprise

I know.  Just watched the left in Colorado vote for a progressive semi-socialist for there gubernatorial candidate....  Going to repeal tabor, mandate universal health care (even though we voted it down in 2016), and mandatory state funded pre-school.  Can't even pay for road re-construction but somehow we are going to pay for all that....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

26 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

Her platform is incredibly naive...  How the hell are we supposed to pay for all that?  Unicorns and rainbows?  I just don't get the millennial obsession with socialism...

Free college for everyone would cost about $70 billion per year, or about 10% of military spending, which she would cut in the last bullet point. The jobs thing is just increasing the minimum wage.

Medicare for all really would just change how you pay for health insurance (taxes instead of paying a private company) All that money is already being paid to hospitals already.  The government would be able to control prices better than the consumer of health care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, nocoolnamejim said:

Well, for example, the giant tax cut that was passed this year. "How are we supposed to pay for all of that?" should apply to that too I think.

Oh I agree with you.

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

 

Free college for everyone would cost about $70 billion per year, or about 10% of military spending, which she would cut in the last bullet point. The jobs thing is just increasing the minimum wage.

Medicare for all really would just change how you pay for health insurance (taxes instead of paying a private company) All that money is already being paid to hospitals already.  The government would be able to control prices better than the consumer of health care.

I'd be ok with cutting military spending by 10% and devoting the money to free college. Heck, we'll be well on the way once the troops in Korea come home!

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

 

Free college for everyone would cost about $70 billion per year, or about 10% of military spending, which she would cut in the last bullet point. The jobs thing is just increasing the minimum wage.

Medicare for all really would just change how you pay for health insurance (taxes instead of paying a private company) All that money is already being paid to hospitals already.  The government would be able to control prices better than the consumer of health care.

70 billion is low and does not include the inevitable increase in costs directly related to subsidizing education.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

 

Free college for everyone would cost about $70 billion per year, or about 10% of military spending, which she would cut in the last bullet point. The jobs thing is just increasing the minimum wage.

Medicare for all really would just change how you pay for health insurance (taxes instead of paying a private company) All that money is already being paid to hospitals already.  The government would be able to control prices better than the consumer of health care.

The Insurance and Healthcare Lobby are some of the most powerful on the Hill.

 

I have a hard time seeing Congress actually removing the free market completely in that sector, regardless of which party controls the houses.

Also, Big Pharma's lobby would likely (again, they did it w/ACA) not be effected, just basically guaranteed insane profits by govt mandate.
 

There are a lot of obstacles to overcome to make changes or progress on the whole mess; that's why GOPers couldn't even repeal ACA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

70 billion is low and does not include the inevitable increase in costs directly related to subsidizing education.

 

 

Bingo!  Whenever the Government is involved costs tend to increase.

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mugtang said:

Bingo!  Whenever the Government is involved costs tend to increase.

Call it $80 billion per year then? Or $90 billion? It doesn't really change @bsu_alum9 's underlying point that the money can be found. It just depends on how and where you prioritize the spending. 

Nobody's really actually directly addressed his point. Thomas said it was politically problematic to pull off. (True.) You and HR_Poke suggested it probably would cost a bit more than the amount bsu_alum listed (likely also true) but nobody's really actually directly dealt with the point that it could actually be paid for by diverting funds from someplace else...in this particular case a "someplace else" that likely has a waaay overly bloated budget as is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...