|
Post by Pharozonk on Jul 25, 2017 19:47:53 GMT -5
There we go! Let's build airports and highways. That will cost a ton of money, but on top of creating jobs during the building, the region will have a competitive infrastructure that will help stimulate the economy for decades after that. I don't know if it's possible, mind you; I'm no economist. I know the public debt is currently too high because of the Great Recession. However, things like the extra 15 billion dollars given to defence in the latest budget could probably help in developing West Virginia and Kentucky. Open a DARPA lab ove there or something, an F-22 maintenance base, or whatever can be done as well there as in more affluent regions. Well, that's Keynesian economics in a nutshell: the government intervenes during periods of downturn through spending. The problem is that these are short-term solutions to long-term problems. Tax dollars alone usually aren't enough to fund these programs, especially in poorer states that already don't have high functioning economies. That leads to the federal government having to rely on investors or loans from foreign countries. If they want to avoid having yet another loan/debt hanging over them, they either have to stick to the budget and re-allocate money they already have (which the federal government never does) or dig themselves deeper into debt, which they usually ends up doing. This inevitably requires higher taxes to deal with and it's Average Joe who gets stuck with the bill.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jul 25, 2017 20:14:47 GMT -5
There we go! Let's build airports and highways. That will cost a ton of money, but on top of creating jobs during the building, the region will have a competitive infrastructure that will help stimulate the economy for decades after that. I don't know if it's possible, mind you; I'm no economist. I know the public debt is currently too high because of the Great Recession. However, things like the extra 15 billion dollars given to defence in the latest budget could probably help in developing West Virginia and Kentucky. Open a DARPA lab ove there or something, an F-22 maintenance base, or whatever can be done as well there as in more affluent regions. Well, that's Keynesian economics in a nutshell: the government intervenes during periods of downturn through spending. The problem is that these are short-term solutions to long-term problems. Tax dollars alone usually aren't enough to fund these programs, especially in poorer states that already don't have high functioning economies. That leads to the federal government having to rely on investors or loans from foreign countries. If they want to avoid having yet another loan/debt hanging over them, they either have to stick to the budget and re-allocate money they already have (which the federal government never does) or dig themselves deeper into debt, which they usually ends up doing. This inevitably requires higher taxes to deal with and it's Average Joe who gets stuck with the bill. Except Keynes advocated government spending only in the short term, to stimulate economic growth, then reining it back in as the economy recovers. The problem of government is in the method of application, such as on the wrong types of programs. It needs to be on infrastructure, which helps improve things for the populace. Things like the Tennessee Valley Authority and WPA projects had long term benefits, offsetting the public expenditure. meanwhile, politically motivated projects override more beneficial ones and the whole think turns into pork.
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Jul 25, 2017 20:17:39 GMT -5
Well, that's Keynesian economics in a nutshell: the government intervenes during periods of downturn through spending. The problem is that these are short-term solutions to long-term problems. Tax dollars alone usually aren't enough to fund these programs, especially in poorer states that already don't have high functioning economies. That leads to the federal government having to rely on investors or loans from foreign countries. If they want to avoid having yet another loan/debt hanging over them, they either have to stick to the budget and re-allocate money they already have (which the federal government never does) or dig themselves deeper into debt, which they usually ends up doing. This inevitably requires higher taxes to deal with and it's Average Joe who gets stuck with the bill. Except Keynes advocated government spending only in the short term, to stimulate economic growth, then reining it back in as the economy recovers. That's true, but we've seen that the federal government, on both Dem and GOP aisles, doesn't know how to stop spending anyway and continue to drive up the debt.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 21:20:36 GMT -5
About Obamacare
On a personal note, I went to the Dentist last Monday and had the worst appointment of my life because it is the first appointment under Obamacare rules. You have to have your Blood Pressure checked. So, they strap this thing on my left wrist of which I've complained to my brother that this thing is hurting my wrist badly and they did it twice and that's made it sheer agony and I preferred my blood pressure checked the old way the middle portion of my upper arm.
My blood pressure normally is 125/70 and that thing and my anxiety attacks (they did it twice) the reading was 141/85 twice and that alone made them do it twice and the thing on my wrist hurts even more. I did not wanted to tell them and cause a scene because I get agitated and mad at the same time and I wasn't feeling very good that day either because the appointment at 11 and I had a headache came on at 9:30 in the morning.
In all the years that I ever gone to the Dentist, I have never, ever had my blood pressure checked and therefore my last visit to the Dentist was a very unpleasant one because of Obamacare and I wished (on a personal note) that Obamacare didn't exist at all because anytime you have anything done with your face, eyes, teeth, and even ears ... you are subjected to a Blood Pressure Routine because Former President Obama has signed that into law and that made this patient in an anxiety attack and having gone to the Dentist for more than 50 years - I did not have to have my Blood Pressure checked.
I asked my Brother yesterday afternoon to have my blood pressure checked - this time I knew about it and it's reads 120/65 and that's normal for me and my Doctor says you are in good health and all that. So, my last appointment to the Dentist was a very unpleasant one because of one unexpected surprise - A Blood Pressure Check that went sour on me - TWICE.
That's why I don't care for Obamacare and I have to pay $25.00 (at the Dentist) for this lousy crap of which my Doctor does it for FREE - Twice a year because he wanted to make sure my Blood Pressure is okay.
I just wanted to vent my unpleasantness of Obamacare in a very personal way.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 21:25:04 GMT -5
My dentist doesn't check my blood pressure so I don't think that's related to obamacare.
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jul 25, 2017 21:29:10 GMT -5
My dentist doesn't check my blood pressure so I don't think that's related to obamacare. My dentist checks my BP as well, although I wouldn't attribute that to ACA without being 100% certain that was the case, which I'm not.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 21:31:50 GMT -5
My dentist doesn't check my blood pressure so I don't think that's related to obamacare. My brother and I go to the same dentist and according to them they have to go by Obamacare rules or otherwise lose their practice. I don't know about your dentist and where you live - but according to my Dentist and my Brother called the Office it is Mandatory that they did this check. This is from my Brother's words that he told me yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 21:32:50 GMT -5
My dentist doesn't check my blood pressure so I don't think that's related to obamacare. My dentist checks my BP as well, although I wouldn't attribute that to ACA without being 100% certain that was the case, which I'm not. I've heard of it being done, but it's not across the board so I'm thinking it's just a new "best practice" than an edict but as you said, I'm not 100% sure either.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 25, 2017 21:39:16 GMT -5
My dentist doesn't check my blood pressure so I don't think that's related to obamacare. My brother and I go to the same dentist and according to them they have to go by Obamacare rules or otherwise lose their practice. I don't know about your dentist and where you live - but according to my Dentist and my Brother called the Office it is Mandatory that they did this check. This is from my Brother's words that he told me yesterday. A quick search seems to posit that this is not the case: This from American Dental Association : Although apparently some state dental boards do include a provision requiring checks(apparently Texas) I see no mention of it being linked to Obamacare online.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,376
|
Post by shaxper on Jul 25, 2017 21:44:37 GMT -5
Can we please call it the Affordable Healthcare Act? Calling it Obamacare politicizes it in a way that it doesn't need to be politicized. This isn't about Obama, nor is it about Democrats vs. Republicans. It's about finding the best way to ensure that hardworking Americans don't go bankrupt for getting cancer.
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jul 25, 2017 21:44:59 GMT -5
True, but I can't believe that everyone in West Virginia is a coal miner. There are more than 100,000 of them, after all. I was more thinking of things like the great infrastructure program that Trump promised, in the tradition of Roosevelt, or things that the government controls directly, like defence installations, official paperwork-handling and the like. Our own government did that here a few decades ago, putting a major tax form processing centre in a disadvantaged region far from the big cities. The problem with corporate welfare is that corporations do not have the greater good in mind. They are not evil either, but they are definitely amoral: their sole responsibility is to their owners and shareholders, and profit is the utlimate goal. When a low-level public investment can result in a company staying in a disadvantaged region the matter deserves to be studied, but not when every job saved ends up costing the public twice what the workers end up making. There we go! Let's build airports and highways. That will cost a ton of money, but on top of creating jobs during the building, the region will have a competitive infrastructure that will help stimulate the economy for decades after that. I don't know if it's possible, mind you; I'm no economist. I know the public debt is currently too high because of the Great Recession. However, things like the extra 15 billion dollars given to defence in the latest budget could probably help in developing West Virginia and Kentucky. Open a DARPA lab ove there or something, an F-22 maintenance base, or whatever can be done as well there as in more affluent regions. I think a mix of programs like RR suggests and simply moving to where there is work is the answer. I know that second option isn't popular but it's a hard truth many face whether it's popular to say or not. I taught high school History and creative writing at a small school up in northern Maine for two years after college but after that they decided to merge a couple school systems together I found that I no longer had a job. I loved living up in the big woods, it's the most beautiful place in the whole United States in my fine opinion, and I didn't want to leave and neither did my girlfriend but it just wasn't economically viable to stay there after I lost my job so we moved down to Massachusetts where the jobs were more plentiful. We didn't want to go, and it was very difficult decision but it made the most sense. And I'm hardly alone, people move for job opportunities all the time and sometimes in areas where a certain industry dries up that means some populations of people may be disproportionately affected and that is terrible for those areas...but it happens all the time and with out the associatef push the coal industry has so I'm not convinced the efforts to help the coal industry have anything to do with the plight of the little people and everything to do with the wealth of the people on top of it. It's easy to say "just move to where the jobs are", but you have to understand these folks have lived in these areas for generations. Their great-great-grandparents and every subsequent generation of their family lived in the same small town, attended the same small church, fished the same small stream, and hunted the same big forest. They have family graveyards literally on their own property, with the original members of the family to die higher up on the hill, with later generations buried further down the hill as time has gone on. You're telling these folks that they need to leave everything and everyone and every place they've ever known and start somewhere else, which isn't viable, because for a lot of these folks, they either worked the mines or in industries associated with the mines, or they own/owned small businesses in those areas that have either shut down or are struggling to stay open. They don't have the skills or the money to just pick up and move from their homes, homes they couldn't possibly sell for money anyway, because no one in their right mind would move there because there are no jobs. Besides that, they don't want to move. They would be perfectly content to live out their days there and eventually die in that little town, except for the fact that they don't have a job, but the likelihood they could get a job and afford housing, transportation, etc. elsewhere is slim because they would be going there with no savings, no skills, and no support network. Maybe the younger generations can get out to new places, provided they go to school and get an education, but for the folks in their 40s or older, they're going to watch their livelihood, then their town, then their friends and family die slowly while they are powerless to do anything about it. What's tragic is these are the people without whom America would never have become the powerhouse it did. It was their work in the mines, doing dirty, dangerous, and deadly work, that helped propel the US steel industry to the heights it did, which in turn powered the US auto industry to its greatness, and now, they're just victims in flyover states, too unimportant to anyone except to be used as a political football every four years when the two parties need their votes. It's trendy to talk about the decline of the inner city, such as Detroit and Chicago, and decry that, but what is happening in rural America is just as much a shame.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 23:47:48 GMT -5
About ObamacareOn a personal note, I went to the Dentist last Monday and had the worst appointment of my life because it is the first appointment under Obamacare rules. You have to have your Blood Pressure checked. So, they strap this thing on my left wrist of which I've complained to my brother that this thing is hurting my wrist badly and they did it twice and that's made it sheer agony and I preferred my blood pressure checked the old way the middle portion of my upper arm. My blood pressure normally is 125/70 and that thing and my anxiety attacks (they did it twice) the reading was 141/85 twice and that alone made them do it twice and the thing on my wrist hurts even more. I did not wanted to tell them and cause a scene because I get agitated and mad at the same time and I wasn't feeling very good that day either because the appointment at 11 and I had a headache came on at 9:30 in the morning. In all the years that I ever gone to the Dentist, I have never, ever had my blood pressure checked and therefore my last visit to the Dentist was a very unpleasant one because of Obamacare and I wished (on a personal note) that Obamacare didn't exist at all because anytime you have anything done with your face, eyes, teeth, and even ears ... you are subjected to a Blood Pressure Routine because Former President Obama has signed that into law and that made this patient in an anxiety attack and having gone to the Dentist for more than 50 years - I did not have to have my Blood Pressure checked. I asked my Brother yesterday afternoon to have my blood pressure checked - this time I knew about it and it's reads 120/65 and that's normal for me and my Doctor says you are in good health and all that. So, my last appointment to the Dentist was a very unpleasant one because of one unexpected surprise - A Blood Pressure Check that went sour on me - TWICE. That's why I don't care for Obamacare and I have to pay $25.00 (at the Dentist) for this lousy crap of which my Doctor does it for FREE - Twice a year because he wanted to make sure my Blood Pressure is okay. I just wanted to vent my unpleasantness of Obamacare in a very personal way. NOTHING to do with the ACA ("Obamacare").. your disdain is misplaced. texags.com/forums/35/topics/2345245and if your co-pay is only $25? you have pretty good coverage.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 26, 2017 8:21:27 GMT -5
I think a mix of programs like RR suggests and simply moving to where there is work is the answer. I know that second option isn't popular but it's a hard truth many face whether it's popular to say or not. I taught high school History and creative writing at a small school up in northern Maine for two years after college but after that they decided to merge a couple school systems together I found that I no longer had a job. I loved living up in the big woods, it's the most beautiful place in the whole United States in my fine opinion, and I didn't want to leave and neither did my girlfriend but it just wasn't economically viable to stay there after I lost my job so we moved down to Massachusetts where the jobs were more plentiful. We didn't want to go, and it was very difficult decision but it made the most sense. And I'm hardly alone, people move for job opportunities all the time and sometimes in areas where a certain industry dries up that means some populations of people may be disproportionately affected and that is terrible for those areas...but it happens all the time and with out the associatef push the coal industry has so I'm not convinced the efforts to help the coal industry have anything to do with the plight of the little people and everything to do with the wealth of the people on top of it. It's easy to say "just move to where the jobs are", but you have to understand these folks have lived in these areas for generations. Their great-great-grandparents and every subsequent generation of their family lived in the same small town, attended the same small church, fished the same small stream, and hunted the same big forest. They have family graveyards literally on their own property, with the original members of the family to die higher up on the hill, with later generations buried further down the hill as time has gone on. You're telling these folks that they need to leave everything and everyone and every place they've ever known and start somewhere else, which isn't viable, because for a lot of these folks, they either worked the mines or in industries associated with the mines, or they own/owned small businesses in those areas that have either shut down or are struggling to stay open. They don't have the skills or the money to just pick up and move from their homes, homes they couldn't possibly sell for money anyway, because no one in their right mind would move there because there are no jobs. Besides that, they don't want to move. They would be perfectly content to live out their days there and eventually die in that little town, except for the fact that they don't have a job, but the likelihood they could get a job and afford housing, transportation, etc. elsewhere is slim because they would be going there with no savings, no skills, and no support network. Maybe the younger generations can get out to new places, provided they go to school and get an education, but for the folks in their 40s or older, they're going to watch their livelihood, then their town, then their friends and family die slowly while they are powerless to do anything about it. What's tragic is these are the people without whom America would never have become the powerhouse it did. It was their work in the mines, doing dirty, dangerous, and deadly work, that helped propel the US steel industry to the heights it did, which in turn powered the US auto industry to its greatness, and now, they're just victims in flyover states, too unimportant to anyone except to be used as a political football every four years when the two parties need their votes. It's trendy to talk about the decline of the inner city, such as Detroit and Chicago, and decry that, but what is happening in rural America is just as much a shame. My girlfriend's family practically founded the town we lived in, the same way you described the folks working in the coal industry and yet she pushed to move because it was no longer viable for us to live there anymore and it would be mulish to do so in the face of reality. What I did, and what countless other people do every year is not easy, I never said or implied it was, but you have to do what you have to do in order to survive. And not having money or "skills" aren't reasons they can't make hard choices either, Megan and I had about 3 grand between us when we found an apartment down here which just covered first and last and gave us time to find jobs real quick in retail. It wasn't a glamorous lifestyle, and neither one of us had resumes that screamed, "these people should be moved up!" but we have because we parlayed the skills we did have into our new jobs which allowed us to advance and gain a lifestyle where we can now talk about starting a family again. There's nothing to stop a coal miner, even a 40 year old one, from doing the same. Life changes, and sometimes you have to adapt. And the fact that the coal industry was responsible for powering America doesn't make it deserving of protection now, not when many other industries(some that employ far more people than coal) are facing similar declines. It's sad and a shame, you're right...but it's not substantially different than what's happening all over so why the political push? The only difference I see that makes coal special is the fact that,as I said, the owners are billionaires who donate a lot of money to politicians. So buying into the narrative that we need to help these people, while being a good populist message because it does elicit sadness, just rings as pandering to me and I hate that kind of political pandering more than anything else. If they were really after protecting the little people they'd be equally emotional political pushes for small businesses, fishermen and rural schools...and yet coal get's named dropped far more often and the only substantial difference between these industries is the one that makes it clear. Money.
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jul 26, 2017 9:35:51 GMT -5
So, now Trump is reversing anti-discriminatory actions at an unprecedented level. Last year, the Sec. of Defense announced a lifting on the ban of transgender serving in the military. There are estimates as high as 25,000 currently serving transgender, with other between 10 and 15,000. Now, someone who has never served a day in his life has stripped away their right to serve their country, openly and honorably. His proclaimed reasoning of medical costs is bulls#$%. His reasoning is bulls#$%. These are men and women honorably serving their country, not selling it out to Russians, corporate interests, or personal gain. The act of taking rights away is unconscionable. And how does he announce it? Does he take the podium and address the press face to face? No, the cowardly little sh@#$ does it another f#$%ing tweet!
I served in the time when gay and lesbians were openly banned from the military, before Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I saw too many good people drummed out of the service due to fear and ignorance. The institution of that policy, a minor step that it was, put a stop to that (provided the servicemember kept quiet about their orientation). It was the right thing to do. Eventually, they progressed enough to fully protect those servicemembers. Now, a pampered, draft-dodging trust-funded, conniving, con artist, sexual predator, liar, self-absorbed, autocratic, mindless euphemism for genitalia says that a class of people aren't worthy to serve. I guess he missed the part about protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I didn't when I took my oath and neither did those servicemembers.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Hal on Jul 26, 2017 10:33:35 GMT -5
So, now Trump is reversing anti-discriminatory actions at an unprecedented level. Last year, the Sec. of Defense announced a lifting on the ban of transgender serving in the military. There are estimates as high as 25,000 currently serving transgender, with other between 10 and 15,000. Now, someone who has never served a day in his life has stripped away their right to serve their country, openly and honorably. His proclaimed reasoning of medical costs is bulls#$%. His reasoning is bulls#$%. These are men and women honorably serving their country, not selling it out to Russians, corporate interests, or personal gain. The act of taking rights away is unconscionable. And how does he announce it? Does he take the podium and address the press face to face? No, the cowardly little sh@#$ does it another f#$%ing tweet! I served in the time when gay and lesbians were openly banned from the military, before Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I saw too many good people drummed out of the service due to fear and ignorance. The institution of that policy, a minor step that it was, put a stop to that (provided the servicemember kept quiet about their orientation). It was the right thing to do. Eventually, they progressed enough to fully protect those servicemembers. Now, a pampered, draft-dodging trust-funded, conniving, con artist, sexual predator, liar, self-absorbed, autocratic, mindless euphemism for genitalia says that a class of people aren't worthy to serve. I guess he missed the part about protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I didn't when I took my oath and neither did those servicemembers. Well said, cody! You and your words are a tribute to the highest ideals of our military and our country. Thank you.
|
|