Anonymous wrote:

The white working class thinks racism is a valid political platform. They will continue to vote against their own interests as long as they imagine they are screwing racial minorities, especially black people. They are paying the price with lowered life expectation, higher suicide rates, high rates of drug abuse, and other effects. It serves them right.

Who's the racist here? Wow, just wow.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great question and has perplexed me forever. Why would anyone who is middle class or poor and in danger of losing a job or health care vote for the Trump. A rich guy who has gotten there on the backs of these very people, who will never think about them and only themselves. It is like they believe if they just get a guy in office that looks like them they will be just fine. Someone explain how people consistently vote against their own pay checks and families. Is it fear? Is it hatred? Who does this?

It’s quite simple, really.
Many of us in the middle class realize that the more “power” we give to the government in taking care of us, the more freedoms we lose as a result.
Like the ACA - we essentially handed over the power to the government to mandate health insurance for all, and in turn, gave up our freedom to choose what plan suits us and our families. Don’t need birth control? Too bad, you’ve got it. And, you don’t have young kids who need dental coverage? So sorry, pal, you get it anyway.
So, simply put, we value freedom more than we value “free things.”

Just curious -- what health insurance *doesn't* provide coverage for things you don't need?

I find most critics of the ACA are actually criticizing all insurance -- they just don't seem to understand how insurance works.

Also why we need a single-payer system.

There are aspects of a single payer system that I like but as someone with a great deal of experience in this field it is not a panacea.

I dunno. Cut costs in half while people live just as long if not longer. That's about as close to "panacea" as you are going to get.

There is no substance in your response. Cut costs in half? Have you looked at the costs of Medicaid and Medicare?

As for living longer. Won't help. One of the main reasons we have a lower life expectancy in the U.S. compared to nations like Japan and Canada is obesity (over 1/3rd now) and that is a huge strain health care costs.

Right, the fair comparison is against the cost of senior citizens healthcare.

I'm going out on a limb that you can read a graph, but WTH I'll give it a shot:

The chart is meaningless on it's face and especially as to your point of cutting costs.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great question and has perplexed me forever. Why would anyone who is middle class or poor and in danger of losing a job or health care vote for the Trump. A rich guy who has gotten there on the backs of these very people, who will never think about them and only themselves. It is like they believe if they just get a guy in office that looks like them they will be just fine. Someone explain how people consistently vote against their own pay checks and families. Is it fear? Is it hatred? Who does this?

It’s quite simple, really.
Many of us in the middle class realize that the more “power” we give to the government in taking care of us, the more freedoms we lose as a result.
Like the ACA - we essentially handed over the power to the government to mandate health insurance for all, and in turn, gave up our freedom to choose what plan suits us and our families. Don’t need birth control? Too bad, you’ve got it. And, you don’t have young kids who need dental coverage? So sorry, pal, you get it anyway.
So, simply put, we value freedom more than we value “free things.”

? If you don't have young kids why are you getting coverage for young kids? And if you do have young kids, you do need some kind of dental coverage. That's crazy to think you don't.

Hey, I hate that we have such easy access to guns, but sorry, pal, we get it anyways.

See, this is my problem with those people who are so gung-ho about the ACA.
Pediatric dental coverage is REQUIRED for all ACA-compliant plans - whether you have children or not.
Guess you didn’t know that. Makes me wonder what else you don’t know about it.

Dental insurance, for the most part, isn’t covered under ObamaCare (the Affordable Care Act). However, children’s dental coverage is a required benefit included on all ACA compliant plans and cost assistance can be applied to any Marketplace plan that includes dental.

http://obamacarefacts.com/dental-insurance/dental-insurance/

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great question and has perplexed me forever. Why would anyone who is middle class or poor and in danger of losing a job or health care vote for the Trump. A rich guy who has gotten there on the backs of these very people, who will never think about them and only themselves. It is like they believe if they just get a guy in office that looks like them they will be just fine. Someone explain how people consistently vote against their own pay checks and families. Is it fear? Is it hatred? Who does this?

It’s quite simple, really.
Many of us in the middle class realize that the more “power” we give to the government in taking care of us, the more freedoms we lose as a result.
Like the ACA - we essentially handed over the power to the government to mandate health insurance for all, and in turn, gave up our freedom to choose what plan suits us and our families. Don’t need birth control? Too bad, you’ve got it. And, you don’t have young kids who need dental coverage? So sorry, pal, you get it anyway.
So, simply put, we value freedom more than we value “free things.”

? If you don't have young kids why are you getting coverage for young kids? And if you do have young kids, you do need some kind of dental coverage. That's crazy to think you don't.

Hey, I hate that we have such easy access to guns, but sorry, pal, we get it anyways.

See, this is my problem with those people who are so gung-ho about the ACA.
Pediatric dental coverage is REQUIRED for all ACA-compliant plans - whether you have children or not.
Guess you didn’t know that. Makes me wonder what else you don’t know about it.

Dental insurance, for the most part, isn’t covered under ObamaCare (the Affordable Care Act). However, children’s dental coverage is a required benefit included on all ACA compliant plans and cost assistance can be applied to any Marketplace plan that includes dental.

http://obamacarefacts.com/dental-insurance/dental-insurance/

Yes, but if you don't have children on your plan you don't get pediatric dental. Get it now?

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote: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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a great question and has perplexed me forever. Why would anyone who is middle class or poor and in danger of losing a job or health care vote for the Trump. A rich guy who has gotten there on the backs of these very people, who will never think about them and only themselves. It is like they believe if they just get a guy in office that looks like them they will be just fine. Someone explain how people consistently vote against their own pay checks and families. Is it fear? Is it hatred? Who does this?

It’s quite simple, really.
Many of us in the middle class realize that the more “power” we give to the government in taking care of us, the more freedoms we lose as a result.
Like the ACA - we essentially handed over the power to the government to mandate health insurance for all, and in turn, gave up our freedom to choose what plan suits us and our families. Don’t need birth control? Too bad, you’ve got it. And, you don’t have young kids who need dental coverage? So sorry, pal, you get it anyway.
So, simply put, we value freedom more than we value “free things.”

Just curious -- what health insurance *doesn't* provide coverage for things you don't need?

I find most critics of the ACA are actually criticizing all insurance -- they just don't seem to understand how insurance works.

Also why we need a single-payer system.

There are aspects of a single payer system that I like but as someone with a great deal of experience in this field it is not a panacea.

I dunno. Cut costs in half while people live just as long if not longer. That's about as close to "panacea" as you are going to get.

There is no substance in your response. Cut costs in half? Have you looked at the costs of Medicaid and Medicare?

As for living longer. Won't help. One of the main reasons we have a lower life expectancy in the U.S. compared to nations like Japan and Canada is obesity (over 1/3rd now) and that is a huge strain health care costs.

Right, the fair comparison is against the cost of senior citizens healthcare.

I'm going out on a limb that you can read a graph, but WTH I'll give it a shot:

The chart is meaningless on it's face and especially as to your point of cutting costs.

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Globalization is a natural extension of capitalism. The only way to rein it in is through government control. Guess who doesn't want government control?

Then please explain the Clinton Team trade agreement making.

NAFTA? Papa Bush made that agreement. Team Clinton just oversaw its ratification and implementation.

Anonymous wrote:

The white working class thinks racism is a valid political platform. They will continue to vote against their own interests as long as they imagine they are screwing racial minorities, especially black people. They are paying the price with lowered life expectation, higher suicide rates, high rates of drug abuse, and other effects. It serves them right.

Who's the racist here? Wow, just wow.

We need a dictionary feature around here. It's not "racist" to say that people deserve their
comeuppance for racist voting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to figure out a cost structure so that people know what they are going to pay from office to office. Personal example - blood tests cost me $10 at labcorp and almost $500 at a hospital lab. After calling the insurance company to try to confirm that costs were not different. Apparently, I didn't ask the question the right way?

Oh, and under the same damn insurance company (but a name change for my husband's company), my daughter's generic ADHD meds went from costing $5 to $50 per month. The brand name, which makes her sick to her stomach, now is cheaper than the generic.

Fucking insurance companies.

And if you think our current system isn't limiting what type of care we receive, you're nuts.

Insurance companies are the reason your costs have gone up, not ACA.

Overall...your comments are BS. For one thing...in order for your blood test at LabCorp to have cost you $10 is simple, it's a co-pay. Not the actual cost.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
any who want jobs have high school educations and cannot find decent opportunities. Labeling them as uneducated is a stretch.

But having a President who will somehow get companies to bring back manufacturing jobs is not capitalism. It's gov't inserting itself. So, all those Trump supporters who hate that gov't is getting too big, meddling, are saying that they do want the gov't to meddle, but only if it benefits them.

The days of good jobs for low skilled workers are gone. Do people want us to go back to the 50's when these types of jobs were plentiful? In order to get a good paying job these days you either need a college education or some training in a specific field. What is the definition of "poorly educated" -- not having a HS diploma would fit into this category. So, these folks want good paying jobs with benefits but not have to even finish HS? That is what I call entitled, and this is partly what's killing America.

Some people, genetically, just are not academics and never will be. They can be very nice people, very talented with physical work, but just never will write essays on "catcher in the rye". What should those people do? Just crawl under a rock and die?

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.