Pelosi wants artsy-fartsy types to be able to be comfortably under/unemployed...

Those are day jobs for the professionals that work them. Hobbyists at any vocation must needs keep their 'day jobs' because those are their actual jobs. Expecting your hobby to pay you bills is the same as wishing to change careers, not that there is anything wrong with that.

It is now the time to stop all of the smoke and mirrors, to drop the obstructionist lying and stonewalling and the overt attempts to do an end run around the supreme court to overthrow Roe v Wade and just pass this sukka. If we need to tweak it later to make it better, than we should do that. If we do not start to address huge problems like this, we are going to go bankrupt as a nation.

We already pay through the nose for indigent health care in the ER, this will at least be a beginning in controlling that wasteful practice while caring for these folks humanely.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It probably won't, very much. Apparently, it will eliminate some of the "pre-existing condition" fear that prevents people from interrupting their current health insurance, or taking any kind of actual risk of losing it, but that is just a step in the direction of job mobility.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My opposition to the bill is that it simply isn't the job of government to "reform" healthcare or ensure that everyone has it. The fact that it's going to cost at least several hundred billion dollars makes it even less popular an idea with me.

And I have no contempt for the arts. I just don't think they should be subsidized by taxpayers.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Whereas the way I see it is that we, not a few powerful executives and their lobbyists, have the right to make the rules in how you are and how you are not allowed to do business in our country. We are about to say, "Guess what? You can't fuck people over for pre-existing conditions anymore, if you want to run an insurance company!" And we are allowed to do that. This is our country, and we can make whatever god damned laws we want to. We're not going to turn around and go home feeling sad, just because you yelled "NO." Even on the off chance the bill doesn't pass, it'll go through in due time.

I heard it was going to cut the deficit, actually. I'm not sure I trust the CBO.

My GOD!!! Between you and me, buddy--really, you can PM your answer to me if you really don't want to answer publicly--I just want to know how your use of "artsy-fartsy" is supposed to leave ME with the impression that you have respect for the arts. It doesn't sound to me like you do.

 

80% of the jobs done in the USA by citizens should be outsourced. It is only because are business leaders are inefficient that we still have many of these jobs. We should close our schools and universities. We won't have any use for those workers so why waste money educating them.

We have Chinese for manufacturing, Indians for our tech jobs, Indians trained more cheaply in India for our doctors, Filipino trained nurses for our nurses, and Mexican illegal immigrants any unskilled jobs that need to be done in the USA so Americans should really just get out of the way and sell their land and stock to Saudis and Chinese and other people who's nations export more than they import.

Keeping the dollar high for Wall Street and bailing out Wall Street when they make mistakes are the only suitable role for government. People should stop whining and move in with their parents and learn how to cook potatoes. People need to learn to put on more clothes and huddle together when they are cold and take off cloths and sit under a tree when they are hot. You can fan yourselves with a piece of cardboard.

There is no point in having health care for workers we don't need and with the dollar being this high foreign workers are just plain more cost effective.

There is nothing wrong with the artsy fartsy reading poetry to each other or the vicious watching cock fights, these are both the sort of low cost entertainment that we will need in the new USA after the rest of the jobs have gone to lower cost workers.

Even if Americans say they are willing to work for lower wages you should never hire them because they will always be miserable because their parents used to be paid better.

 

I think it is.

It comes under the heading of child care, roads, care of agricultural lands, and similar fundamental responsibilities of a community governing itself.

I have never heard of a community's government that completely abandoned its role in organizing the health care and medical issues within it, but some do a better job than others.

 

You're welcome to believe that. I still don't think the government has the right to legislate our economic affairs in such a way. They have the power to do it, but not the moral right.

Government programs usually cost a lot more than the politicians tell us they will when trying to get laws passed. I'm more worried about the growth in the size and influence of government than any shrinking of the deficit that may possibly occur as a result.

I'm not worried about your impression. But the term "artsy-fartsy" was used to describe people who Pelosi wants to have the option of living off taxpayers while pursuing their dreams to be artists, writers, actors, potheads/professional video gamers, etc.

I enjoy art, am an avid reader and watch a lot of movies. But I believe the arts should be subject to the same "survival of the fittest" rules that I apply to other businesses.

 

So the government should be our doctor, parent, and farmer? Is there anything you don't think the government should be empowered to do?

 

No. And your immediate flight to absurdity reveals your actual position here, which is thoughtless.

Free markets will not raise children - the community organizes that, politically, with deliberate overriding of free market tendencies

- which would (we know from experience and reason) produce child slavery, dead orphans, wandering gangs of adolescent boys living off the land, and other evils (never mind luxuries like literacy). You take these kinds of arrangements for granted, but they involve severe curbing of individual freedoms and denial of market choice in the short run, to gain community good and general improvement of life (including greater actual freedom) in the long run -

from even a strictly economic perspective, to shortchange the all important investment in human beings when they are very young.

Free markets will not sustain agriculture - the community organizes that, with deliberate overriding of free market tendencies

- which would (we know from experience and reason) produce Tragedies of the Commons and destruction of investments across the supporting landscape, as the temptation of short term gain, sloth, and ignorance or bad judgment, however temporary or episodic, destroy piecemeal and for long terms the genetic crop resources, soil, and watershed -

to wreck the agricultural base of everyone's food supply.

The question is: are the kinds of factors that make a free market in child raising impossible, in agriculture destructive, also found in medical care and public health? For example, are the cumulative external benefits and costs of individual medical decisions so large that market decisions unable to account for them are thereby unable to efficiently allocate resources?

The answer to that is obviously yes, IMHO. Consider vaccinations, for one obvious example - how dumb do you have to be to deny polio vaccine to the children of anyone unable or unwilling to pay for it? How dumb do you have to be to even consider charging some kind of "market price" for individual polio vaccinations?

 

Maybe you should read what they said about Social Security when it passed? Government is stupid at economics- this is the only thing that can be trusted.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Peace be unto you

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!