People need to at least finish HS, and get some training. This isn't the 1950's where you can get a good job without finishing HS. These people weren't left behind by society; these people stuck their heads in the sand and refused to come into the 21st century. I have a family member like this. He laments that everything is done electronically. He refuses to learn to use a computer and still wants to be able fax documents and use an electronic typewriter. I have another family member who doesn't have a college degree. This person got laid off from a receptionist job. She took unemployment and went to job-training programs that were offered by the EDD. She is now employed again, but doesn't get paid very much. There are actually some pretty high paying jobs that don't require a college degree, but they do require training in a specific field, like highly skilled machinists. These people can get paid close to $100K/yr, and companies are having a hard time finding qualified workers. The Electrician that came over to our house to do some work told us about how he can't find qualified people to hire. He is willing to train, but some of the guys he's tried to train can't do simple math or are too lazy. He owns the company and wants to retire from doing the electrical work but still run the company, but he can't because he can't find good people, even if he is willing to train. Finish HS, get some training, and don't expect the gov't to find you a job. |
Look, I called to try to find out what having the test for my toddler done at the facility I was already standing in would cost me vs. heading to a labcorp. Yes, I basically paid a copay at labcorp-I know that now. But it would have been nice if the person on the other end of the phone had told me that it was in my best interests to take the paperwork and my child to the labcorp rather than find out weeks later that indeed, my out of pocket going to the lab at the Inova center was absolutely ridiculously higher. |
We need a dictionary feature around here. It's not "racist" to say that people deserve their comeuppance for racist voting. |
NAFTA? Papa Bush made that agreement. Team Clinton just oversaw its ratification and implementation. |
| One could easily argue the corporate wing of the democratic party which runs things doesn't have their back either, and ultimately it won't matter who they vote for. |
Why is the chart meaningless? It looks like countries with single payer pay half what we pay with better results. That seems very meaningful to me. |
| In all honesty, the people matter very little to politicians. Someone has to pay for their campaigns. Big corporations and the NRA basically get what they want in our current system. |
And I guess now the NRA will be contributing beaucoup bucks to Trump's campaign now that they have endorsed him. |
| WaPo in 2004 did a series on this. Basically said the work T class vote for values/beliefs rather than self-interest. And there have been plenty of studies that say the reason why the working class doesn't seem to support policies in their economic self interest is because many of them believe they will be rich someday/win the lottery. |
| The working class in general are turned into political scapegoats. One side says the white poor are stupid racists and never vote their interests. The other side says Hispanics are all illegal and stealing all our jobs and blacks are lazy government mooches. It's often asked why do working class whites vote Republican? Clinton gutted welfare, supported NAFTA which shipped away good paying working class jobs, and drove mass incarceration. Why do working class blacks support the Clintons? I can't fully answer these questions. But I suspect a part of the reason why working class voters are loyal to particular candidates and parties is because institutions such as churches and radio shows help to keep them in line, mad at the so called enemy and looking for a savior in one of the two main parties. |
This. I feel like both parties have taken a "divide and conquer" approach. Divide the working class/middle class along racial lines so their ire is directed at each other and it takes the attention off of the combined political/wealthy/corporate class. |
Yes, but if you don't have children on your plan you don't get pediatric dental. Get it now? |
I don't understand why this discussion of ACA is in this thread. It should be a thread all its own. I'd like to point out, though, that you are still paying for pediatric dental, even if you don't have children. You just aren't getting the benefit. The point people are saying is that because ACA plans have to include those things, they can't discount their plans for people who don't want that coverage. So if you are a man and get an ACA-compliant plan, the plan still includes pregnancy coverage, birth control, et cetera. You don't get a cheaper rate, even though you won't use those benefits because they are standard features of the plan. That's the point you are missing. The upside is that those features don't cost more if you do need them. For example, pre-ACA, a woman purchasing a plan on the open market would have to pay more for the pregnancy coverage. Now, she doesn't have to because it is standard. But the unintended consequence is that everyone pays more. It's not like the insurance companies just take a hit. The cost is just spread around. Where I differ with the people who are complaining about ACA is that I think singlepayer is a better option because it takes some of the power out of the hands of insurance companies, which are for-profit entities. |
Yes - everyone knows the US spends more per person on healthcare than any other industrialized nation, but have mediocre health outcomes. I remember reading a study a few years back that ranked healthcare for 50 most industrialized countries USA was #1/50 in terms of cost with roughly #35/50 in terms of health outcomes. The cost per person in the US was approximately 2X other industrialized nations. This covers to advertising, lobbying and CEO pay packages. |
NP. I agree with everything the PP says except that it serves them right. Racism has been a double whammy served up by both private interests and public institutions forever and I think it will desroy this country before it ever goes away. For both business and government, it's been a way to distract a working class from wage suppression and keep them from unionizing or joining forces in any way for better conditions. And it's worked. Worked so well that it's costing us billions every year, made us vulnerable on many fronts, and still our quality of life hovers at third world country levels for a large part of our population. That lie that Trump tells about immigration is as low as they come and as old as American politics. Republicans will never stop relying on it because business wants dirt cheap labor but they're not allowed to treat Americans like slaves. Though that hasn't stopped the coal industry. I posted this article in another thread. http://www.dailyyonder.com/letter-from-langdon-trumps-atomic-knee-drop/2016/05/03/12869/ I read it weeks ago but it's stayed with me. Perhaps because I'm a Fed who works in rural health and knows that the level of crisis is mindblowing compared to what we're doing to address it. The current president is the only one who has made an effort at combating poverty in rural areas and he's been fought on those efforts by nearly every Republican office holder from city council to U.S. Congress, for no reason I can discern except racism. It's breathtaking because hundreds of people are dying every day from this opioid epidemic and these yahoos are whipping up anger about bathrooms. I don't protest with #BLM, but I'm black so I get it. And reading that article made me - finally - get the All Lives Matter response. I don't know what the last straw will be on the destructive nature of our all American racism. It seems people really want to hold on to it and we're prepared to accept a lot of pain and misery to preserve it. |