Forums / Discussion / General

Biden surrogate confirms what we knew all along, and that is, unlike Trump all Biden has to do is hide except on rare occasions(like George Floyd's murder) so essentially people mostly get to imagine Biden like when he was clear minded during the Obama years and not senile.

I think its less all he has to do and more all he can do, and its gonna come up against a brick wall when the question of debates comes to a head.

Yesterday was a big win for LGBT rights in the Supreme Court, as they ruled that those who are LGBT can challenge their firing in court if it was on the grounds of discrimination.

Cant help but feel all ot has changed is that employers will have to spend a minute thinking up an excuse.

As if 2020 wasn't absolutely insane as it is. There has been some major border skirmishes between China and India has occured. Leaving 20 Indian Army Personnel and 43 Chinese troops dead.

These occured in the Ladakh region, in the northern part of India an area bordering China (Tibet), Pakistan, and India. There has been a few reasons offered into the reasons for the border dispute – primarily that India has been building infrastructure in the region.

I however think there is a larger issue at stake that a very poignant video from Caspian Report highlighted recently. Primarily, Tibet is China's ticket to regional hegemony. The idea being that Tibet is the source of many of the rivers that flow into South East Asia, India, and Pakistan. And Chinese control of up-river sources and daming operations in the name of renewable hydropower could spell disaster to countries down river.

Think of it the way Russia utilizes gas-pipelines to wring political concessions out of the West. The ability to use natural resources as a leverage isn't new, and has been a staple of geopolitics for centuries. (OPEC turning off oil shipments to punish western support of Israel as an example).

But the bigger picture is this:

There are more people in the circle in the above image than outside of it. More than half of the global population lives in this region. With 3 Nuclear Powers (China, Pakistan, India), that strongly dislike one another.

Tensions in the region are at an all time high. China and Pakistan have a close relationship, meanwhile India and many South East Asian countries do not get a long with China, and stand an existential crisis due to having China (which is growing increasingly distrusted and disliked) being in near total control over their water sources.

Hopefully this is Chinese saber-rattling for internal nationalist zeal to offset the growing internal and external problems that occurred from COVID. Otherwise escalation of the conflict could erupt into something absolutely massive.

Thank the GODS for this amazing news

"Amy Klobuchar drops out of Biden VP contention ":https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/18/politics/biden-vice-president-amy-klobuchar/index.html

I hated her and my biggest fear was biden would pick her as VP. She was the one person who would have made me second guess my vote for biden.

Worse than harris?

yes

“She was the one person who would make me second guess my vote for biden”
how?
seriously how is she any worse than him?

she is more conservative and much less open to more left wing policies. Biden is moderate, but more open and friendly with people like Sanders.
Klobuchar is easily the most conservative person among the top people that are theorized to be picked as VP.

DC judge rules that America is a parody

what exactly is the point of that law

I think it's to incentivize big pharma companies to sell their stuff at more reasonable prices. It's not much, but that's exactly why seeing a judge block that is ridiculous because it's not even a serious regulation but the judge is treating it as if it is.

>I think it's to incentivize big pharma companies to sell their stuff at more reasonable prices.

How does this possibly do that?

Actually know this one. The thought is that if there was an advertised MSRP price, then it reduces the amount of blindsiding consumers get hit with. Ideally, if, say, a hospital charges a 600% markup, it's easier for consumers to call them out on it.

Anyway, why I'm here: Is it funny if nobody showed up to Trump's "covid waiver" rally, good that the crowd was so small, or sad that they're still crowding together the under-capacity crowd together without masks?

> it's easier for consumers to call them out on it.

And what does that accomplish, exactly?
"You charged me a 600% markup!"
"yes"
then what

Like, we all already know they markup drugs, so there is no additional public outrage.

Additional way the current medical industry is FUBAR: contesting hospital bills is considered a consumer protection. They actually expect people, who are often near-death to haggle with medical providers.

>contesting hospital bills is considered a consumer protection.

What do you mean? I know hospitals will usually lower costs for uninsured people if they bring it up, but thats the hospital's choosing, not law, right?

Also, as the article explains, there is no MSRP, they basically just sell the drug at different prices to different customers depending on what they can afford.

Have you ever seen an itemized hospital bill? It's fucking MADNESS. We're talking $200 bags of saline, out-of-network ER doctors, and getting charged for piss sample jars that never get screened. So if you see a drug charged at $90 a dose, but it's advertised at $10 a dose, you'll be able to complain to the billing department like you do with $45 advil. That is the concept, just the concept.

You're 100% completely right that this has no legal bearing on prices and at the end you're still at the whim of your provider and if they want to hear you complain.

Anyone see that the Columbus police just issued a statement saying that they will refuse to follow the law and continue to disobey the mayor?

lol they are complaining they had to put away their toys

The Fraternal Order of Police is a blight upon the Law Enforcement Departments of this country.

You know, you guys reverting to snark and vitreol are missing the part thats supports your viewpoint

This is a police union stating that the cops havent been trained in any method of crowd control that doesnt involve tear gas.

Trump wants to lower coronavirus cases by taking less tests

Cases are going up in the U.S. because we are testing far more than any other country, and ever expanding. With smaller testing we would show fewer cases!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 23, 2020

It's like he got an email from someone in his administration that said that and Trump accidentally added it to his mental notes.

America needs free healthcare. plain and simple

The Trump admin. plans to end federal funding and support for coronavirus testing sites at the end of this month, @NBCNews has learned. pic.twitter.com/6JPPHra2Xk

— CNBC Now (@CNBCnow) June 24, 2020

There is no such thing as free healthcare.
No country in the world has free healthcare.
Universal Healthcare is not free, it is paid for by tax payers. To pretend otherwise is rhetorical nonsense. To acknowledge the fact that universal healthcare has a social and economic cost – which it does – you can start the conversation with cost-benefit analysis.

With the current tax models, a universal healthcare system in the US is virtually impossible. You would have to radically change the tax percentages that Americans in all economic brackets would have to pay. Then comes the question for many people: Is it cheaper to have privatized healthcare with insurance – or paying the extra taxes that would grant me the same level of healthcare.

We can have a discussion about that – we should have a discussion about that.

>There is no such thing as free healthcare.

jesus christ we know that. we mean FREE TO USE. Do you get into fit when offered free samples because the samples cost money to make?

>Then comes the question for many people: Is it cheaper to have privatized healthcare with insurance – or paying the extra taxes that would grant me the same level of healthcare.

paying the extra taxes would be cheaper for majority of americans and gives access to everyone, not just a select few.

DC Circuit Court of Appeals orders Judge Sullivan to drop charges against Mike Flynn.

The same Flynn that plead guilty to lying to the FBI, twice.
He was already charged and was awaiting sentencing.
And the Judge leading the ruling was a Trump appointee.

Trump's Crime Family Department of Justice REALLY wants Michael Flynn out of jail.

You may know that, but a lot of people don't. Over-simplified political rhetoric is what sells people on ideas. People hear "free" and they assume that they won't have to pay anything. So taking your example of "free samples": Free samples do not cost me anything. They certainly cost something. "Free" Healthcare does cost, will cost me.

So here's the difference. I don't doubt that people largely understand that something always has cost. The assumption is that they won't bare that cost. That's simply not true.

>paying the extra taxes would be cheaper for majority of americans and gives access to everyone, not just a select few.

To reach the same level of healthcare they have now? I don't know.
Given that the vast majority of healthcare insurance is partially paid for by employers? There is a lot of assumptions the math-wizards behind political campaigns like to play with to make the case for universal healthcare. All of these assumptions tend to be radically optimistic – and if history has anything to show about taking only the optimistic assumptions, you're going to be horribly surprised when the sledgehammer of reality hits you.

We don't even have to go that far to see how many promises and over-optimistic points that the ACA promised that never panned out to see the point in this.

Taxes would have to be raised on everyone. How much – I don't know.
Bernie Sanders wanted to expand Medicare to accomodate everyone. Today, Medicare costs the US federal government $740 Billion dollars of it's entire federal budget. In 6 years it's going to be $1.2 Trillion because of the baby boomers retiring. Currently, 15% of the population receives Medicare – if we are going to expand Medicare to 100% of the population, or roughly 6.66 times more than the current population, you can project t hat it would cost the US 4.96 Trillion dollars. To put that into perspective our current federal budget is $4.829 Trillion dollars. Our revenues $3.86 Trillion dollars. Now granted, there is a lot of nuance – since most people on Medicare are elderly and are expected to utilize hospitals, and medicine more often so we don't know if it will cost 6.66 times as much.

And you pay into Medicare – mind you. So we don't even know to what part of medicare we are talking about here. For most of us Medicare B is the most applicable. And according to Medicare B you're still expected to pay a monthly premium (which if I compare to what I'd pay if it was just me – is about 15 dollars cheaper than what I get out of my insurance).

Regardless, I'm not arguing for status quo. I am a strong believer that healthcare in the US needs massive reform across all levels. I just not sold on the idea that universal healthcare schemes are going to work the way most politicians promise it will, with the cost-benefit that they promise. Nor am I sold on the idea that it will roll out the way most people want considering that the vast majority of Americans are content with their current healthcare coverage.

But what I hate, absolutely hate, is the use of buzzwords words like "Free" for political expediency. Especially on topics and issues that are as serious and massive as universal healthcare.

>You may know that, but a lot of people don't.

An overwhelming majority completely understand what free means in the context. No one besides strawmen made up by you people think healthcare workers are going to start working for free under m4a

Welcome to the plea deal system, where the sanctity of confessions are contaminated by coercion. Save the time, sweat and tears (not to mention lawyer fees) required to fight for your innocence by taking a lighter sentance and allowing us to say justice was served.

'Course, when that coertion is all the prosecution has to work with, things are destinded to unravel should the defendant plant his feet and say: "no, you move".

Just thinking of the backlash that would come from people knowing the costs of many (potentially necessary) drugs may cause some smarter executives to double think the price point of what they're selling.

Especially if another company can do the same thing but cheaper

But we already know that, and they already face backlash for it.
Why would they be worried about backlash? You gonna boycott medicine you need to live?

That only makes me confused as to why anyone would then say "Free Healthcare" if the majority understand that it isn't free. That it isn't free in any capacity at all!

So you're saying Flynn perjured himself before the judge?

Dont think guilty pleas are made under oath and nailing him for having lied about being guilty would require proving he was innocent of the original charge.

…You really want to catch 22 this?

I'm not making this a Catch-22. Flynn did.

He either lied to the FBI under oath, or he lied to the judge when he plead guilty (which are taken under oath, and the judge even asked if everything he's saying is true).

And lying to the FBI was the charge he plead down to, if he didn't want to go down over conspiracy to kidnapping or worse. As Judge Sullivan put it, he sold out his country.

Trump talks tough on Venezuela, but admires thugs and dictators like Nicolas Maduro.

As President, I will stand with the Venezuelan people and for democracy. https://t.co/eUt28UxyXS

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) June 22, 2020

whats wrong with what biden said

He may be a brutal dictator but Maduro is still the president of Venezuela. Juan Guaido has no power so we should not recognize him as president. The goal should be to keep relations with other countries(even communist ones) good. Remember that we live in 2020 not fucking 1960. And Joe Biden has zero room to claim Trump "admires dictators". He was Obama's VP for all eight years of his presidency and Obama made as many dictator friends as Trump and I didn't hear a goddamn peep from Biden. Just because Biden was Obama's VP doesn't mean they had to agree on everything you know that, right?

> Juan Guaido has no power so we should not recognize him as president.

biden doesn't say he should be though?

> Obama made as many dictator friends as Trump

who?

"biden doesn't say he should be though?"
I legitimately can't tell what you're trying to say there

"who?"
Xi Jinping, Raul Castro, the King of Saudi Arabia, and my personal favorite, Vladimir Putin

>I legitimately can't tell what you're trying to say there

Biden made no mention of Juan Guaido in that tweet.

>Xi Jinping, Raul Castro, the King of Saudi Arabia, and my personal favorite, Vladimir Putin

When did he ever become friends with them?

>Biden made no mention of Juan Guaido in that tweet.
But the tweet he was replying to did. In Biden's reply he says he'll stand for democracy in Venezuela and Guaido is supposedly the democracy guy.

>When did he ever become friends with them?
When he was president

>But the tweet he was replying to did. In Biden's reply he says he'll stand for democracy in Venezuela and Guaido is supposedly the democracy guy.

Oh, i guess. I don't see the problem with that though

>When he was president

I don't believe you

Xi Jinping
Castro
King Abdullah
(I was wrong about the Putin part)

>Xi Jinping

I think you read the headline the wrong way around. The article discuss their success in trade. Nothing about obama praising him as a person or leader.

>Castro

Again, only thing in that article is Obama receiving praise, not giving.

>King Abdullah

"True, no one would accuse Obama of being as unrelentingly servile to the kingdom as Trump currently is."
The article doesn't claim they were friends, just Obama was soft on them.