Jump to content

Bink

Members
  • Content Count

    7,909
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    26

About Bink

  • Rank
    What are you doing here?
  • Birthday August 20

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

17,533 profile views
  1. Obvious troll. Three teams with a clear cut QB.
  2. I still fundamentally disagree with the comparison you are making (the coal miner analogy remains weak and the equivalency dangerous), and your take on Bernie's motivations. I don't think he's flying without a plan nearly as much as you say and I think normalizing Trump by pitting the two against each other as foils or alternative versions does more harm than good. I don't think either of us are going to move the needle in one direction or the other in this regard. But why not the more nuanced message you have here instead of focusing on that? As mentioned, I don't fault people for not supporting Sanders and at least the questions you raise here are worth considering. I agree with you that healthcare, the economy, student loan debt, and other crisis points (the environment) are looming large. When will be the exigent time? I suppose I disagree with your fear that things are going to happen "overnight". I think the agencies implementing these policies will be drawing on applicants from these same industries and we won't suddenly see people with terminated contracts coming out of the blue. I also don't really care too much about the short term hit to something like the boomer's and their 401ks, but I get why you might. Republican policies are already aiming to gut their safety net, I'm confident Bernie at least won't do that. I think eventually some generation is going to have to be brave and invest in the future, and I don't disagree at all that Warren might do that. So when it comes to the specific of what you believe in this instance, I can respect that a lot more what I've seen earlier--I just think perspectives like the ones you articulated earlier--instead of stating policy disagreement with Sanders--question his legitimacy and seat at the table as well as his intentions. To me, it's this widely held perspective that is going to disengage a lot of people who resonate with his message. Maybe not boomers with 401ks, but the people really suffering in this country. I disagree with you saying you don't think he's put a lot of time into understanding issues like the housing crisis. I also don't really see a lot of political rhetoric that goes beyond ideology even from Warren.
  3. Haha, I do all of this for my own personal catharsis. Not worth it in real life, but here?
  4. Of course many of these hyper specific questions will need to be more carefully refined, but many of these questions can be found answered by the Physicians for a National Health Program here: https://pnhp.org/what-is-single-payer/senate-bill/ and on the individual FAQ sheets: https://pnhp.org/system/assets/uploads/2018/06/faq_2018.pdf Overall, the anxiety about staffing these systems--you will obviously need to transition administrative systems and resource pools--the same people doing this type of work will be implemented to do things like on boarding and credentialing. Part of the proposal of the bill is to save administrative cost though and reduce administrative bloat--just like coal workers would need to be transitioned out of that line of work into other industries/responsibilities, there would need to be work with jobs programs and unions to help transition individuals to new roles or new opportunities. There would necessarily be some job loss, but the new administrative roles created would absorb some of this loss. I think this is an acceptable price to pay on a societal level improve a fundamentally broken system that will only get worse until the end of time if we keep going down this path. As for questions about what happens to these providers, we will still need networks to coordinate care and run administrative costs. We will still need actual providers of services. Some of your questions are answering themselves--what happens to the jobs v. do the have the staffing and resources. In terms of systems and processes, of course we will need time to build a system that can handle volume and process it. Of course billing codes might change and your IT department might have to make adjustment. Any large scale implementation of a national program is going to require a lot of maintenance. Please note that I also am not naive enough to believe that Bernie Sanders is going to have the political capital or magic wand to implement exactly what he wants, overnight. Just like with the ACA there will be a political process that refines the system that is actually implemented. The very technical details of a program and a policy are less exigent than your large level questions--it would benefit your credibility if you could separate your argumentative claims in this way. I agree that mitigating job loss and implementing the administrative systems will be vital parts of the process--is that juice worth the squeeze?
  5. People who are truly moderate understanding the importance of authentic listening and applying empathy and critical thinking. Not dismissing anything that doesn't feel like a Bush and a Clinton bashing heads against each other.
  6. "Troll." You aren't trolling. The shit you are posting is so beyond vague--2 + 2 does not equal 10. Okay, dude. You are coding a personal motive to someone, "he's fighting for himself" with no real evidence other than the fact that you think his policy proposals are "fantasy." How does your personal feelings about feasibility equate to motivation? I can already tell from your basic bitch claims "demonizing different people" that you aren't paying much attention to the actual rhetoric, policies, and actions of the humans you are talking about. I don't care if people support or do not support Sanders. Whatever. But a lot of people who are barely engaged in the political process have surface level opinions. Maybe that's trolling, but trolling implies you believe something more substantial than you are actually presenting. Perspectives like yours are not uncommon. Maybe there's more to it than what I'm seeing here. In reality, all you serve to do is silence discussions that need to be had and further normalizing the most toxic elements of our party based political system. At least with these posts, anyways. By all means, let's have that substantive discussion if you are are capable of getting over your own annoyance. Until then, keeping hoping and praying for your democratic version of Jeb Bush, who also won't get anything done except for enacting policies that benefit the people paying for him to be there. "Its annoying."
  7. I'm sorry, I don't accept the argument of "the foundation of America is freedom" as a means to defend our for profit medical system that has driven the cost of medical care cripplingly high. Right now the "choice" people are facing is whether to die of a disease or die from the cost of their healthcare. I disagree that radically changing this system is going to suddenly rob you from your choice. I think there are legitimate criticisms of Sanders's plan, but the loss of choice isn't one of them I'm overtly concerned with from reading into the bill. We may no longer have to make the false choice between insurance companies negotiating prices from hospitals.
  8. No, I disagree. I agree that both use emotional appeals and pathos. I disagree that Sanders is deliberately trying to exploit ignorance or is as insulting or is as dishonest, which is inherent to being a demagogue. And I'd love to see a unbiased comparison of the rhetoric that demonstrates this factual and undeniable truth you've seemed to come across. Maybe I have too much of an interest in the rhetoric of the men themselves and the implications of it. As I said, I think the appeal to emotion and the appeal to populism is there. Does that mean we can dismiss the presence of policy discussion and the volume and frequency of dishonesty and the tone and level of speech? I certainly acknowledge there's some truth in what you are saying but is it the whole truth?
  9. Look at the nuances of the policy decisions and how the government provides social security and public goods. Just saying "it's fReE stUfF" is the most simplified and generalized take. When you send your child to a public school, do you expect someone to be saying "WHO OFFERED YOU THAT FREE SCHOOL!?!" Or what about when you drive on a road or use a park or some other fucking public good? The reality is we, as citizens, contribute to the public good and how the government provides and shares resources for all. The idea of making a college education "free" (as if tuition is the only cost) is because of a response to the student crisis debt we are facing. You can look at your own state (if you live in TN) to see a model that makes sense and shows how a policy decision like this can work. Right now in this country we have a very legitimate crisis centered around healthcare. It's costly as a nation, and it's costly for individuals. Should we just ignore the actual policy behind single-payer in order to keep enabling a system where we let our fellow citizens lose everything because they get cancer? I'm fucking over it. The idea is shifting the social cost so that it doesn't destroy lives. There's nuance in the policy and information that can support making the decision or confirm it's not a functional reality. Generalizing to the point where we don't actually examione policy implications is how we ended up with the reality TV star who just started shouting "build a wall."
  10. If this take was any lazier it would be a Republican stereotype.
  11. Right. It's a massive generalization that enables you to sit back and wash your hands of an issue. Saying that progress is slow does not mean you dismiss the people driving the conversation and pushing for change.
  12. I am so sick of the false equivalency here. You can find instances of political aggressiveness the second you look into any politician advocating for change. Yes, both men are taping into populism, but Trump's dehumanizing rhetoric is an entirely different brand of populism. I realize that the extent to which bad media coverage and lazy analysis leads all of us to normalizing Trump and comparing him to Sanders, but I'm afraid just washing of our hands and saying both are "symptoms" of the same problem is not good enough anymore. For starters, Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric is an evolution of the racist birther messaging that launched his career. Studies showed that Obama supporters switched to Trump because of race, that cultural displacement was a big motivator for Trump's support. While this is true of the fabled white working class voter, that is a smaller portion of the electorate and Trump's base and American voters in general. We can't generalize this and wrap it up neatly in the blanket of economic disadvantage. I say all this to say that, while comparisons exist between the two, painting them as opposite ends of some kind of spectrum and equalizing them in that way is fuckery. I don't care if people don't support Sanders, but there's a smarter, more responsible way to do that. Media coverage of him as a whole is terrible and enables this laziness.
  13. So what is he supposed to do? Not acknowledge that our health system is broken and that a medical emergency will leave many Americans in bankruptcy? Ignore the data that says Medicare for all will save us money? It's not gullible to talk about a rational policy idea and engage a broken system with that idea in hopes that you get some kind of movement in that direction. We know Sanders will be working with a hostile congress, but that's the reality for any politician. One of the basic starting points of your argument here is your cynicism that is uniquely applied to him--at least he is actually articulating plans to help people in areas of healthcare and climate. What's radical about Sanders is he's the one person looking from the bottom up and not the other way around. If his policies seem like fantasies, it's because everyone else in our political system seems interested protecting the money of the wealthy. Have you even looked at his career, and the totality of what he's supported? I agree that he is pushing hard against the norm and it will be a challenge to implement what he wants to implement. But that doesn't mean he shouldn't campaign and fight for it, and give people a choice to maybe address the most central issues we're facing today. It's just ridiculous to see people ignore the context and nuance of politics and political change to making sweeping generalizations about the one person who dares to advocate for big policy changes that might actually help poor people. You can keep feeding into this bullshit if you want to, but I'm over it.
  14. @Rolltide Who isn't disowning Bloomberg? Fuck Bloomberg, I've believed that from the get go. He got bodied by Elizabeth Warren in less than 15 seconds in the debate. Trump is willing to get personal and nasty. Bloomberg looked helpless in the debate--does anyone really think a diet version of Trump beats him a street fight? Come the fuck on. Bloomberg looked bewildered out there. No amount of money in the world can change that. Most liberal people in my circle wanted him to fuck off from the beginning. Disown him? Here ya go:
  15. @Pragidealist-based on your description everyone in American politics has to be a con then if you are evenly applying the mental gymnastics you are doing to get from point A to point B.

Titans Report Footer Logo

Titans Report is a fan operated website for the Tennessee Titans. The site includes a message board, blog, podcast, organized fantasy games,and a mobile site. The podcast has had on many prominent members of the media covering the Titans. Some names include John McClain of the Houston Chronicle, Jim Wyatt of the Tennessee Titans official website, Paul Kuharsky of 104.5 The Zone, Phillip B. Wilson of the Indy Star, Jonathan Hutton of the Titans Radio Network, Sal Capaccio of the Buffalo Bills Radio Network, Scott Wright of Draft Countdown, and others.

Recent Posts

Newest Topics

Official Website

Kuharsky's Blog

ESPN NFL Nation

104.5 The Zone

102.5 The Game

TITANSLINKS

×
×
  • Create New...