@The Aspie Corner

40 years of Libertarian rule, folks. That's what got us here. Most Libertarian idiots will deny it, but that's just what is.

There is NO such thing as an unregulated free market. Markets always have rules. The only difference is who makes them. When an honestly democratic government makes regulations to protect the People and maintain as close to a "free enterprise" environment as possible, the markets are as free and fair as markets can be. Only one alternative exists or can exist: the "Law of the Jungle" where the biggest and strongest dictate the terms for all.

We've had the latter for the past 40 years, and one effect is that those who wield rule-making market power because of their massive wealth are also exercising that power on the government itself.

Despite conservatives' repeated promises of a golden age for this dropping of the reins by the government, what most Main Streeters have gotten because of it is pain and harms.

That's what got us here. Most Libertarian idiots will deny it, but that's just what is.

@ggersh

When cops can kill w/out fear and our pol's
can pass laws that only milk the public while
enhancing their pockets, it seems as the only
solution is that revolution we seem to never
have.

punctuation corrected

When we lose the Sino-American War of 2025 (World War IV), we'll get that revolution. (Cat spare us!)

that reside in DC every election cycle
for the next 5 elections might accomplish
something in getting rid of the corruption.

But seeing as we live in a fascist country
those hopes won't be realized anytime soon.

When cops can kill w/out fear and our pol's
can pass laws that only milk the public while
enhancing their pockets, it seem's as the only
solution is that revolution we seem to never
have.

@gjohnsit

and essay too. The RW is saying DWS is going down with the Awans. We can hope.

The democraps and the rethuglicans are corrupt and have been purchased in full. It seems it is really the CIA / NSA pulling the strings of power and controlling the media.

@snoopydawg Very good analysis. People are catching on to the Dems' act and they (the people) are not buying it.

I was also wondering how gjohnsit is doing. Despite some severe shoulder and rib injuries, he keeps churning out high quality essays. How do you do that, gjohnsit?

The democrats have been deriding Trump for his policies, yet they are working behind the scenes and working with him.
Many people thought that they made a deal with Trump on DACA because they were protecting them from being deported and they wanted to uphold Obama's legacy. Nope. As usual when this type of thing happens, people should ask what will they get out of making a the deal?
The democrats aren't going to stop Trump and the republicans from passing their tax reform. They are going to work with them.
I hope someone will do an essay on this article. I highly recommend reading it.
Democrats seek to prop up Trump’s crisis-ridden government

One point that stood out for me was on Clinton's welfare reform. If a republican president had passed that, people would have been in the streets over it. Instead they acted just like they did when Obama invaded Libya, was working on the TPP and the other issues that he pushed that would only help the 1% and would hurt everyone else.
Same way that people willingly voted for Hillary regardless of her proven warmongering, her cosiness with Wall Street and the fact that she spent 4 years working on the TPP, but after she decided to run for president, she suddenly thought that it was a bad deal.
This article also addresses Bernie's MFA and calls it a smokescreen to start dismantling it and Medicaid. Anyone still on the fence about Bernie's plan to reform the DP?
Another great essay, gjohnsit. How is your recovery going?

@snoopydawg

about all of the issues that they raise in the article, but it's possible that they are hoping to provide somewhat of a smokescreen. I say that because the Senate HELP Committee starting meeting as soon as they returned from the summer break (Sept 4), in order to negotiate a 'fix' for the ACA and the Marketplace Exchanges. And, they have a deadline the last week of September, because states have to file their new premium rates for 2018.

From a comment I made earlier at EB, here's a list of the members:

Minority Ranking Member, Senator Patty Murray (Democratic - WA)

Senator Bernie Sanders (Democratic - VT)

Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr (Democratic - PA)

Senator Al Franken (Democratic - MN)

Senator Michael F. Bennet (Democratic - CO)

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (Democratic - RI)

Senator Tammy Baldwin (Democratic - WI)

Senator Christopher S. Murphy (Democratic - CT)

Senator Elizabeth Warren (Democratic - MA)

Tim Kaine (Democrat - VA)

Maggie Hassan (Democrat - NH)

Alexander has made assurances that he and Murray will reach an agreement on enough issues to get bipartisan legislation passed.

Several issues that they have tentative agreement on, are not items that I could support.

The two worst ones (that I know of) are,

1) Open up catastrophic (Copper Plans) to Everyone--not just to young folks under the age of 30. Of course the premiums are much lower, so many lower income folks may go into them just to avoid the tax penalty. They are 50/50 plans, actuarially, so they could be devastating to some of the beneficiaries who enroll in them--if they get very ill, that is. Folks may remember that several Conservadems ran on these plans in 2014. Manchin, Warner, Heitkamp, and several who bit the dust--Begich, Pryor, Landrieu, etc. Anyhoo, I think that this is disgraceful, if they agree to it.

2) Another trade-off may be to reform 1332 Waivers. They give states a bunch of leeway over the ACA Exchanges--including which benefits they offer, whether or not to include the 10 EHBs (Essential Health Benefits), etc.

They also are asking to tie the extra 'leeway' for these waivers to the waivers that affect the Medicaid Program. They are called 1115 Waivers.

That could be a real disaster, since Medicaid affects so many more millions of Americans.

Here's a blurb and a link to explain the waivers.

States can receive approval from the federal government to begin state innovation projects in 2017 that would waive certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act pertaining to private insurance coverage. To do this, they can divert the federal money designated under the ACA for premium credits and cost-sharing for another purpose. This analysis describes the possible impact of these waivers on Medicaid and CHIP and how new guidance from the federal government provides some guardrails designed to protect the vital coverage provided by these programs.

While waivers under Section 1332 are related to private insurance, there are several ways they could affect Medicaid and CHIP coverage.

First, states may seek 1115 waivers at the same time that they are seeking 1332 waivers in order to implement a large-scale change in their state’s coverage programs. Second, when private insurance changes, or when the system for applying for marketplace coverage changes, it may have indirect effects on Medicaid and CHIP enrollment.

From what little that I heard of this past week's hearing, it sounded like the Senate HELP Committee could be on its way to reaching agreement on the linkage of the two waivers.

If it happens, it would be a travesty, IMO. Judging by the testimonies that I've heard thus far, (and the reaction of the Chair, Lamar Alexander) I doubt that it will do much good to contact lawmakers, but, I guess it couldn't hurt to try. Patty Murray sounds like she'll agree to anything, just to keep the ACA afloat.

Anyhoo, there's a couple other 'ask fors'--funding the CSRs, and a re-insurance program to keep insurers from taking a financial hit under various circumstances. If I understand it correctly, insurers are threatening to pull out, if they don't get those monies.

[Apologize in advance for typos, etc.]

Mollie

“I believe in the redemptive powers of a dog’s love. It is in recognition of each dog’s potential to lift the human spirit, and therefore, to change society for the better, that I fight to make sure every street dog has its day.”
--Stasha Wong, Secretary, Save Our Street Dogs (SOSD)

SOSD - A volunteer-run organisation dedicated to the welfare of Singapore’s street dogs. We rescue, rehabilitate, and rehome strays to give them a second chance.

On Twitter - SOSD Singapore@SOSDsg

The democrats have been deriding Trump for his policies, yet they are working behind the scenes and working with him.
Many people thought that they made a deal with Trump on DACA because they were protecting them from being deported and they wanted to uphold Obama's legacy. Nope. As usual when this type of thing happens, people should ask what will they get out of making a the deal?
The democrats aren't going to stop Trump and the republicans from passing their tax reform. They are going to work with them.
I hope someone will do an essay on this article. I highly recommend reading it.
Democrats seek to prop up Trump’s crisis-ridden government

One point that stood out for me was on Clinton's welfare reform. If a republican president had passed that, people would have been in the streets over it. Instead they acted just like they did when Obama invaded Libya, was working on the TPP and the other issues that he pushed that would only help the 1% and would hurt everyone else.
Same way that people willingly voted for Hillary regardless of her proven warmongering, her cosiness with Wall Street and the fact that she spent 4 years working on the TPP, but after she decided to run for president, she suddenly thought that it was a bad deal.
This article also addresses Bernie's MFA and calls it a smokescreen to start dismantling it and Medicaid. Anyone still on the fence about Bernie's plan to reform the DP?
Another great essay, gjohnsit. How is your recovery going?

@NonnyO

(ditto Article II, Section 2, first clause of the first paragraph; the context for which it was written is no longer valid, nor is the title).

Good to see you commenting, NonnyO!

I have a question about this line out of your comment. I looked up Article II, Section 2, first clause of the first paragraph. It reads:

The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States;

source

The President is still the Commander in Chief of the regular Military and the Militia (the National Guard today). The Air Force is a spin-off from the Army (of which it was still part as recently as World War II); the Marine Corps is still part of the Department of the Navy to this very minute; and so the relationships extend to them and should.

The President being C-in-C is a major foundation stone of a very important principle, one used by all civilized or civilizable nations, to wit: civilian control of the military. Ask any Rohingya Muslim in Myanmar, or the civilian elected government officials who can do next to nothing to protect them, why civilian control of the military is so important!

So, my question is: did I understand you correctly at all? Did I pull the right clause at all?

Of course, as always, if I misunderstand what you were saying, just please set me aright. (You should know me that well by now!)

The Top Ten Fears of 2016:
Corruption of government officials (same top fear as 2015) - 60.6%
Terrorist attacks - 41%
Not having enough money for the future - 39.9%
Being a victim of terror - 38.5%
Government restrictions on firearms and ammunition - 38.5%
People I love dying - 38.1%
Economic or financial collapse - 37.5%
Identity theft - 37.1%
People I love becoming seriously ill - 35.9%
The Affordable Health Care Act/"Obamacare" - 35.5%

• Corruption of government officials (same top fear as 2015) - 60.6%

UNLESS we get sensible voter registration laws passed, end gerrymandering, eliminate e-voting machines and go strictly to paper ballots that can be recounted in close elections, government at every level (local, state, national) will STAY corrupt, with or without money and favors exchanging hands. Without sensible voter registration laws, paper ballots, and an end to gerrymandering, government corruption will continue, no matter what.

• Terrorist attacks - 41%

• Being a victim of terror - 38.5%

• Government restrictions on firearms and ammunition - 38.5%

Where was this poll taken? What was the average age? These are "big city" and/or "redneck" fears. No Congress Critter will touch gun restrictions with a ten foot pole because the NRA is too strong an influence and they bribe too many of our legislators. Like NRA members, other ignorant people don't read the first clause of the Second Amendment so they don't even understand the historical context or why it was worded the way it was (ditto Article II, Section 2, first clause of the first paragraph; the context for which it was written is no longer valid, nor is the title).

• Identity theft - 37.1%

This could actually be mostly prevented if people would stop publicizing their lives all over the internet, and stop trusting others with their personal and/or financial info and/or passwords.

• People I love dying - 38.1%

This may be a natural fear, but as a person entering the "very old" category, I can say that death is definitely a part of life, and the older one gets, the more often people in one's life die since they are aging, too; this goes for people one loves as well as those whom one knows as acquaintances or used to go to school with or knew in childhood. Death is a fact to be accepted, not feared. We are all destined to die from the moment we are born. Deal with it or get counseling.

• People I love becoming seriously ill - 35.9%

• The Affordable Health Care Act/"Obamacare" - 35.5%

These are natural fears because they could mean financial ruin in many ways. These fears will remain valid until the US becomes a civilized country and finally passes a government-administered, NON-corporate, not-for-profit, single-payer Medicare for All bill. We already pay for Medicare. It really would not be such a headache to switch every person in this nation over to Medicare..., but a LOT of people would have to be hired to do data entry, print out Medicare cards, stuff envelopes, and snail mail them to every person (jobs, jobs, jobs - make them government jobs, not outsourced to those fucking corporations!!!). Aren't all babies now signed up for Soc Sec cards at birth? Or is that just newborns on Medicaid?

It would be very convenient to fold Medicaid monies (from the General fund) into the Medicare Insurance (which we pay for from our first paycheck through our last Soc Sec check) since Medicaid would conveniently cover children who need things like vaccines, etc., and because Medicaid is now a supplemental fund to help not only children but disabled people and senior citizens with costs that are above what Medicare pays. We also need caps put on what clinics, hospitals, labs, medical devices companies, etc., can charge - caps that should have been immediately set because right after Medicare was passed those facilities immediately saw a government cash cow and hiked their prices accordingly..., which then introduced supplemental Medicare insurance, and later we were forced to buy corporate insurance to cover prescription drugs on Medicare Part D (when Dumbya was prez).

We could ALL benefit from the peace of mind of a Medicare for All program where the only thing we'd need to do is show our Medicare card to the clinics, hospitals, testing labs, pharmacies, etc., and never, ever have to receive a bill for medical care or medical equipment necessities. Even if the cost of Medicare went up slightly, it would still be cheaper than paying for a medical insurance we can't use until disability or retirement, and adding the second (much-too-expensive) cost of a corporate medical insurance with sky-high premiums, deductibles, and co-pays which renders it useless to anyone except how much money corporate CEOs and Shareholders get. Corporate medical insurance companies could still be in business for people who choose to have elective medical procedures like unnecessary plastic surgery done (necessary plastic surgery to do such things as repair cleft palates or help burn victims or those disfigured in accidents or by animal bites could be covered by Medicare)..., but there's no reason for the average person to pay those costs for unnecessary cosmetic surgeries.

• Still, at the risk of repeating myself, back to my main point:

UNLESS we get sensible voter registration laws passed, end gerrymandering, eliminate e-voting machines and go strictly to paper ballots that can be recounted in close elections, government at every level (local, state, national) will STAY corrupt, with or without money and favors exchanging hands. Without sensible voter registration laws, paper ballots, and an end to gerrymandering, government corruption will continue, no matter what.