Number of senior FBI & DOJ officials fired under POTUS

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by me again, Jul 3, 2018.

Loading...
  1. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Sorry, I'm calling baloney on this. First of all, Ukraine war is still happening, and Trump is President - and this doesn't even get into specifics which are horrible.
    Second, if Trump can get credit for the economy till March, he sure can and does get blame for the COVID recession. Which he helps exacerbate by failing miserably at testing and public health response.

    (I in a sense admire dedication of someone still cr@pping on ACA after the debacle that was Trump's "repeal and replace". I worry some of these people WILL try to drink disinfectants because Trump suggested that may help).

    I honestly think that any other Dem candidate other than Bloomberg, Bernie, Tulci and maybe Tom Seyer (not sure what that guy was even doing there) are stronger than Joe Biden. The only area Joe is stronger in is Ukraine. But - Joe is good enough, will crush Trump in November, and will assemble a team that is light years ahead of Trump traveling circus.
     
  2. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    One more thing. Trump's biggest draw is finding someone to blame for people's problems, and main entity to blame is immigrants. One would think that ought to be disqualifying for people, especially those who are themselves immigrants. I mean, ffs. Yet, I know hordes of guys in that camp, Lerner is not alone by a mile.
     
  3. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    When it comes to immigration there are many views, I always was for a compassionate approach.
    Maybe some meaningful reform will happen someday.
    But did you see the pictures of children in cages from 2014? (Biden was the VP then)
    • Several 2014 photos of detained immigrant children in cages went viral, and former Obama administration officials rushed to offer explanations.
    • The former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau had even shared the images on Twitter, mistakenly believing they were taken during Donald Trump's presidency.
    [​IMG]
     
  4. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    And this is argument for what, exactly? Obama's record on deportations is controversial. He's also credited for certain improvements, and for trying to pass the comprehensive immigration reform (Congress prevented that). Trump made the policies much, much worse, as is his habit.

    But this is not what I was referring to. Trumpism is scapegoating immigrants. Latest, wholly nonsensical, executive order is but a tiny example. You, sir, are an immigrant. You're not appeasing bigots by agreeing with them.
     
  5. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I don't think there ever existed a government that I fully agreed with all of their, plans, actions, or agendas. One looks at the whole.
    Open borders also not a solution. This topic is complicated. There are serious issues related to human trafficking, and crime when it comes to illegal immigration.
    Legal immigration can be adjusted based on the countries needs.
    Your country has merit-based immigration, Australia also, Germany, and others as well.
     
  6. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    I'm looking at the whole. Trump is that unique case that's lousy no matter how you look. Environment - fail, public health - fail, diplomacy - fail, deficit - big fail, health - sorry, fail again, "the wall" - LOL, infrastructure - fail to launch, rule of law - epic fail. Even his criminal schemes like Ukrainegate didn't work out. His big supporters are vaccine resisters and white nationalists - what does it tell you?

    The current admin projects hostility to "immigrants" as a group. Individual stupid policies are secondary. No one is in favor of open borders, human trafficking, and crime; don't tell me you buy this fig leaf. Trump base wants all of us out of the country; you don't endear anyone by parroting their talking points. Let me remind you that refugees, DV visa winners, "anchor babies", and "chain migration" ALL refer to LEGAL ways to enter the country. So called "anchor babies" are not even immigrants at all.
    "My country" accepts more than twice as many immigrants as US, per capita. Steven Miller would have a heart attack. But actually, few people in US realize that Canadian point system actually have some quite conservative elements.

    Speaking of Canada, we have a working universal healthcare coverage. Pity I'm losing it in the move, it really is a great assurance.
     
  7. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    That's true. For example, any American who's ever really looked at emigrating to Canada knows that it takes an awful lot more than a moving truck.

    Yes, so Canadians often say in their bid to seem more different from Americans than they really are. But I'm not going to defend the U.S. system: a confusing, broken mess of corporatism and overregulation with a bizarre tax code that limits portability. And the moronic, myopic Republicans in Congress squandered what will probably be their last chance ever to introduce any decent market reforms.
     
  8. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Immigration is no trivial affair anywhere; it's so American to be surprised when confronted with this reality. What I meant is how Canadian system selects most people on ability to provide for themselves, and has requirements on minimum funds every independent immigrant brings in. Despite some wrinkles, it tries to be merit-based; very pragmatic, what Republicans claim they want.

    You identified correctly their greatest flaw, but we disagree on details. In fact, fundamentally sound healthcare system (even though I suspect it's nowhere near "best in the world" locals like to claim) and marginally more coherent immigration laws are pretty much only things Canada does better than US. I actually believe there ARE subtle differences between Canadians and Americans - mostly not in Canadians' favor. In fact, during my grad school, we made some friends in Florida (white Republicans, most of them) who made us feel more welcome than the mighty Ukrainian-Canadian establishment in Toronto. USA is special, in many of the right ways. Not in healthcare or current administration, mind you.
     
  9. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    I was on a business trip to Calgary and had a warm welcome from the Ukrainian local community,
    I was invited to participate(not perform :)) in a family-friendly festival, we had grilled fish in a park and homemade, traditional Ukrainian food, it was from the bow river and took the shuttle, etc, and enjoyed entertainment by fabulous international artists conveying the beauty of life through music. I got souvenirs.
    We talked about everything, politics comparing life in different countries, etc.
    As to healthcare
    Government intervention-specifically the Medicaid and Medicare programs are the biggest reason costs are escalating in health care. When Medicare began in 1965, it cost taxpayers about $3 billion per year.
    It was projected back to them that by 1990 the price would rise to $9 billion per year. The 1990 bill was actually $67 billion per year. The pointy-headed theoreticians who devised this program made the mistake of assuming they were operating in a zero-sum game. They never imagined that the very creation of their program would increase the demand for medical services.

    What happens when the government pays for all medical care is that limits must be placed on the amount of care that can be offered. Thus, with such medicine, you will always have rationing of care in one form or another.
    Government is not the solution, Ronald Reagan used to say. The government is the problem. Further intrusion is not the answer. Competition is.
    We need balanced deregulation, reduced government control.
    We also know about medical insurance providers who refuse to provide coverage, so this is why I'm for a balanced approach that will protect everyone as much as its possible.
     
  10. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Good for you. I made a mistake trying to contribute to the community; got anonymous complaints to my work, called "corrupt" person with "intimidating body type", had an "anonymous" letter I still can't read about me to every ecclesial authority in UOCC, and got myself into a failed lawsuit; still owe my lawyer tens of thousands in legal fees.
    On the plus side, I had the pleasure of yelling at my Bishop who tried to yell at me. Also, my daughter attends Saturday School with a son of Rt. Hon. the Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, who may be the only worthwhile person in the community AND the Liberal Cabinet. I had a privilege to sing carols with her once. On balance, I will not miss the diaspora in the slightest, when I fingers crossed will move here to Southern Texas permanently. I have more in common with some Chinese, Filipino, and Jamaican immigrants I've met.

    Dude, rationing of care is a function of not enough resources available; are you really claiming for-profit insurers don't ration?
    Remember, I lived under a single payer system for ten years. We even refer to it as "Medicare", even though it's province-based plans not officially called that (Ontario plan is "OHIP"). My OHIP plan covers all what I need; yes, it regulates access to specialized care, but so do private coverage in US, at twice the price and burdening decision making with "deductibles". I can compare OHIP with one of the best PPOs available in Florida; OHIP wins. The employer based patchwork you have here is fundamentally flawed; it needs redesign, not "deregulation".

    The "balanced approach that will protect everyone" is Joe Biden's plan, which is what I hope for too. It would involve more (and different) government control that lobbyist-designed mess we have now. In fact, I am all for Mr. Sanders' Medicare For All concept; profit-seeking healthcare is flawed. However, Bernie has no chance to actually deliver this and is doctrinaire and dishonest about it; Biden plan at least have a chance to help people.
     
  11. Lerner

    Lerner Well-Known Member

    Once you provide healthcare ( balanced) to all there will be rationing but just like one drives a better car, one can afford to buy supplemental insurance and enjoy better care/coverage(possibly).
    People buy different insurance levels for their vehicles. If a person went to school and took 7 years of hard work and eventually earning more, are we to punish that person?
    My friend's father who lives overseas got ill and it required surgery. He was admitted to a general hospital that is part of the countries national healthcare system with a very crowded room and the waiting list for surgery possibly months.
    Thanks to God he had a supplemental health plan paid by his employer, his wife made a phone call, and next day he was transferred to a hospital with only 2 persons in a room, more medical stuff per patient. The surgery was performed with in a less than 2 weeks. Here is an example, if he didn't have the supplemental insurance he would still get treated but in different conditions.

    I lived and worked in San Antonio TX for a year. I really liked it there. Friendly people, good food, etc.
     
  12. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    A few years ago, I had a terrible stye develop over the course of a few days. Ugly, painful, so bad I could barely see out of that eye. I looked in Google Maps for the closest ophthalmologist, went to his office unannounced, was told by his staff to wait, saw him for a consult within an hour, and 90 minutes later he was performing minor surgery to get rid of it. On the way out I paid them forty dollars. My insurance covered the rest.

    Don't tell me this would happen in Canada. We both know it wouldn't.

    As I said above, there's plenty wrong with the U.S. system. But saying things about it that aren't true isn't constructive.
     
  13. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    The question is, can we really compare access to life-saving healthcare to a better car? I think there are important differences there.

    The opposite issue, of course, is what we can plainly see now: people losing jobs and, with them, access to health coverage. How much sense does it make during the pandemic? Somehow I do not think your friend's father would have had equivalent issues.
    Supplemental coverage has the potential to cause two-tiered medical systems. Banning supplemental coverage, of course, has it's own problems. Can there be a balance? Perhaps. Canadian solution is supplemental coverage exists, but the companies are banned by law from covering services covered by Medicare. So coverage can buy you a private room, but not better place in organ donation queue. I suspect it's not this simple; what is needed here is careful government regulation.

    San Antonio is fairly close by.
     
  14. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    None, although the bizarre and senseless tie between health insurance and employment in the U.S. system is an enduring consequence of price controls enacted during the second world war. Left to a marketplace, that mobility-dampening connection would never have developed.
     
  15. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    It won't. It also won't happen to millions of Americans who do not have adequate access to doctors, no medical coverage, inadequate medical coverage, or no 40 dollars lying around for a deductible. Which are all the things that happen.
    I've told you this: when I was at Florida State (and had a health insurance deemed "adequate" by State Department for international students), I needed a fairly minor surgery which involved about 40 minutes under general anesthetic. I almost had to go without the procedure, because the in-network for-profit hospital quoted about $40000 more than insurance would cover. Thankfully, my doctor's office was willing to do some billing magic to persuade the company to cover this in cheaper, ambulatory setting out of network. On other occasions, we had to beg the hospital to write off part of our bills not covered as a charity case. Later, my wife got a state government job with "platinum" PPO coverage - and still some procedures were not covered as "non-essential", and we went without until after moving to Canada. Also, I was laid off days after my wife gave birth - did not have to worry about coverage, as it had nothing to do with the employer. Thank God Almighty for OHIP, and God keep our Land, Glorious and Free!

    Another story: we did a long-weekend trip to Chicago IL last year, and my little girl developed a viral infection that had her develop croup. She got short of breath in the middle of the night. We went to the emergency room right away; the bill is still not settled, but should be OK under our supplemental coverages; in any case, we will be able to take care of it. I can easily imagine a family hesitant to make this trip to the hospital and hope that symptoms resolve themselves, in fear of medical bills. This thing is resolved in minutes by 1 steroid injection, but can be life threatening if treatment is delayed. Under OHIP - no one would think twice. Do not tell me how American "system" is better. I'm bracing myself for going back to employer-based system at the moment; this is a source of stress, even with above-average income and "good" coverage.

    There is so much wrong with it, it's an embarrassment for a country as great and resourceful as United States of America. Hope it'll get resolved, in some way.
     
  16. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Left to a marketplace, people were buying radium salt tonics, and had their jaws fall off. There is no actual evidence medicine can be a functioning free market, other than your usual libertarian theorems on how everything is one. In healthcare, "customers" often have no choice but need the "product", and have no means to evaluate "product's" quality until, well, it's too late - or later. Plus, no red blooded human is seriously thinking people should die of preventable diseases if they have no ability to pay "market rate". Maybe Paul Ryans and Mitch McConnels of the world do think that, but even they would not say so out loud. Also, medicine is a lot like firefighting: if thy neighbour develops a contagious illness and can't pay, no matter how much coverage you have, you're still in danger. So yeah, not everything is a marketplace.
     
  17. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    And yet, in some other countries, markets for primary care work very well for keeping costs manageable. Dominica is the example with which I have personal experience -- great primary care, no waiting, low cost, and people who can't afford it have options. Hospital care, which is public... well, let's just say you hope you get airlifted to Miami.

    If your argument is that markets don't work for healthcare, you're demonstrably wrong. If your argument is that there should be a safety net for lifeboat cases, whether for people at the bottom who really can't afford primary care or for catastrophic coverage then you're on much firmer ground.
     
  18. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    I don't know anything about Dominica, but, well, isn't this a two-tier system? From where I am, there are clear issues with THAT idea. Maybe not if you are optimizing for great service for people "above the bottom". Pretty much everyone is one car crash from being at the bottom.
     
  19. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Probably, but doesn't everywhere have a two tier system? Well-heeled Canadians who don't want to wait for, say, an MRI can pay out of pocket at a private facility, for example. Anyway, I suppose when you're a middle income country with 60,000-something people, you do the best you can. When someone needs care abroad who can't afford it, you'll often see a community fundraiser to send them. That sounds awful, but it usually does work, and the life expectancy there is only a year and a half lower than in the U.S.
     
  20. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Which is another way to say life expectancy in US is only a year and a half higher than in Dominica.
    A private MRI facility in Canada would be required to take OHIP patients; well-heeled folks who want to cut the line fly into US for that. And I am puzzled with the apparent focus on the needs of well heeled folks who do not want to rub with the proles, Steve - especially since, yah, they'll always find a way.
     

Share This Page