Ur GOP Senate ACA Repeal Bill Open Thread

by

by Ugh

The GOP Senate done released it's ACA repeal bill earlier today.  You can read the bill here if you want.  My brief, fair, & balanced summary: cruelty now, cruelty tomorrow, cruelty forever (even fits in a tweet).

Essentially, the same as the GOP House Bill. 

Was in Vegas on Mon/Tues and it was 117 degrees. Ouch.

Open thread!

778 thoughts on “Ur GOP Senate ACA Repeal Bill Open Thread”

  1. Alternate summary: we’ve given you 140+ pages which are totally and utterly incomprehensible, unless you have a copy of the Internal Revenue Code right in front of you. So there’s little danger that you might read this and figure out just what we are really doing. Makes it easier to spin it — which God knows is going to be necessary.

  2. Alternate summary: we’ve given you 140+ pages which are totally and utterly incomprehensible, unless you have a copy of the Internal Revenue Code right in front of you. So there’s little danger that you might read this and figure out just what we are really doing. Makes it easier to spin it — which God knows is going to be necessary.

  3. Where’s the surcharge for not maintaining continuous coverage? I don’t see it in there. If it’s not, this bill would destroy the individual market so either the Rs are totally feckless or they know it is DOA.

  4. Where’s the surcharge for not maintaining continuous coverage? I don’t see it in there. If it’s not, this bill would destroy the individual market so either the Rs are totally feckless or they know it is DOA.

  5. The surcharge may not have survived the Senate Parliamentarian and the rules for bills being handled under reconciliation. It appears to me that the surcharge is purely a matter of regulating health insurance and does not touch the budget. That would normally make it off limits for reconciliation.

  6. The surcharge may not have survived the Senate Parliamentarian and the rules for bills being handled under reconciliation. It appears to me that the surcharge is purely a matter of regulating health insurance and does not touch the budget. That would normally make it off limits for reconciliation.

  7. we’ve given you 140+ pages which are totally and utterly incomprehensible, unless you have a copy of the Internal Revenue Code right in front of you.
    To be fair, I think that’s true of a lot of legislation – anything that involves changes to existing laws or policies.
    Long ago in a galaxy far far away, I spent probably a couple of hundred hours trying to get my head around the USA Patriot Act. Much of the text of that law consisted of arcane tweaks to existing US Code. It read like instructions for a bizarre treasure hunt game.
    “In US Code blah blah sections mumble, replace the word ‘shall’ in paragraph 7 with ‘must’….”
    Full employment for lawyers!
    But yeah, it’s ridiculous to release stuff like this and expect people to understand it in detail in a couple of days. Let alone vote on it.

  8. we’ve given you 140+ pages which are totally and utterly incomprehensible, unless you have a copy of the Internal Revenue Code right in front of you.
    To be fair, I think that’s true of a lot of legislation – anything that involves changes to existing laws or policies.
    Long ago in a galaxy far far away, I spent probably a couple of hundred hours trying to get my head around the USA Patriot Act. Much of the text of that law consisted of arcane tweaks to existing US Code. It read like instructions for a bizarre treasure hunt game.
    “In US Code blah blah sections mumble, replace the word ‘shall’ in paragraph 7 with ‘must’….”
    Full employment for lawyers!
    But yeah, it’s ridiculous to release stuff like this and expect people to understand it in detail in a couple of days. Let alone vote on it.

  9. Yes, most legislatures write bills in some sort of semi-formal diff format. It was one of the skills I had to master when I was on a state legislative staff. Ordinarily there will be an enrolled version of the sections that are modified that’s readable. However, those are usually classed as internal working papers that are not distributed to the public.

  10. Yes, most legislatures write bills in some sort of semi-formal diff format. It was one of the skills I had to master when I was on a state legislative staff. Ordinarily there will be an enrolled version of the sections that are modified that’s readable. However, those are usually classed as internal working papers that are not distributed to the public.

  11. Michael Cain, I figured that was the case. It doesn’t get around the fact that Senate bill as is would wreck the individual market. I don’t know much about Senate procedure. Can the surcharge be added without 60 votes later or is the concept unable to be passed at all in the Senate without D votes?

  12. Michael Cain, I figured that was the case. It doesn’t get around the fact that Senate bill as is would wreck the individual market. I don’t know much about Senate procedure. Can the surcharge be added without 60 votes later or is the concept unable to be passed at all in the Senate without D votes?

  15. IIRC, the presiding officer of the Senate can overrule the parliamentarian and be sustained by a simple majority. If that’s the route they’re going, I can think of tactical reasons that McConnell might prefer to fight that battle over an amendment.

  16. IIRC, the presiding officer of the Senate can overrule the parliamentarian and be sustained by a simple majority. If that’s the route they’re going, I can think of tactical reasons that McConnell might prefer to fight that battle over an amendment.

  17. That’s why legislatures themselves, as well as non-governmental groups, usually issue legislative summaries
    Thanks sapient!
    Does anyone know if a similar summary has been published for the AHCA?

  18. That’s why legislatures themselves, as well as non-governmental groups, usually issue legislative summaries
    Thanks sapient!
    Does anyone know if a similar summary has been published for the AHCA?

  22. Sorry, my comment got ate, but the link to the AHCA House version is available at the link above.
    Another version by the Kaiser Family Foundation.

  27. Thanks for sharing that wj.
    Yes, this was a crazy FUBAR election. In almost every way imaginable.
    Personally, I think it’s time for federal standards of procedure for federal elections. Mandating, among other things, paper ballots.
    I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections. I’m not fine with all of the half-assed slap-dash ways that many states go about handling stuff at the federal level.
    Who your governor and state rep are affects you. Who your House rep and Senator are affect me. There are gaping holes in the basic reliability and security of the federal election process that are, to me, plainly unacceptable.
    As far as the Senate AHCA bill goes, last time I peeked there were 5 (R) Senators agin it. So, maybe there will be some horse-trading in our future.
    We’ll see where it all lands.
    If you make it really hard for people to just get by in life, it’s not likely to end well. For anyone. This is not a mystery.

  28. Thanks for sharing that wj.
    Yes, this was a crazy FUBAR election. In almost every way imaginable.
    Personally, I think it’s time for federal standards of procedure for federal elections. Mandating, among other things, paper ballots.
    I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections. I’m not fine with all of the half-assed slap-dash ways that many states go about handling stuff at the federal level.
    Who your governor and state rep are affects you. Who your House rep and Senator are affect me. There are gaping holes in the basic reliability and security of the federal election process that are, to me, plainly unacceptable.
    As far as the Senate AHCA bill goes, last time I peeked there were 5 (R) Senators agin it. So, maybe there will be some horse-trading in our future.
    We’ll see where it all lands.
    If you make it really hard for people to just get by in life, it’s not likely to end well. For anyone. This is not a mystery.

  29. Paul Krugman asks:

    So, is this bill good for you? Yes, if you meet the following criteria:
    1.Your income is more than $200,000 a year
    2.You have a job that comes with good health insurance
    3.You can’t imagine any circumstances under which you lose that job or income
    4.You don’t have any family members or friends who don’t meet those criteria
    5.You have zero empathy for anyone else

    Or, of course, if your goal in life is to piss off libruls even if it costs you money.
    –TP

  30. Paul Krugman asks:

    So, is this bill good for you? Yes, if you meet the following criteria:
    1.Your income is more than $200,000 a year
    2.You have a job that comes with good health insurance
    3.You can’t imagine any circumstances under which you lose that job or income
    4.You don’t have any family members or friends who don’t meet those criteria
    5.You have zero empathy for anyone else

    Or, of course, if your goal in life is to piss off libruls even if it costs you money.
    –TP

  37. , I think it’s time for federal standards of procedure for federal elections. Mandating, among other things, paper ballots.
    What we use in California, and have for years, are paper ballots which are electronically scanned at each polling station. The voters feed them into the scanner/repository themselves. At the end of the day, both the thumb drive and the paper ballots get taken off to the county seat to be input to the state totals and archived.
    Electronic fast processing plus an audit trail.

  38. , I think it’s time for federal standards of procedure for federal elections. Mandating, among other things, paper ballots.
    What we use in California, and have for years, are paper ballots which are electronically scanned at each polling station. The voters feed them into the scanner/repository themselves. At the end of the day, both the thumb drive and the paper ballots get taken off to the county seat to be input to the state totals and archived.
    Electronic fast processing plus an audit trail.

  41. I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections.
    i’d like to get some strong restrictions on how districts are drawn. because the current way we do redistricting is an abomination.
    redrawing the lines every couple of years in order to ensure one party’s election chances should be illegal, not business-as-usual.

  42. I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections.
    i’d like to get some strong restrictions on how districts are drawn. because the current way we do redistricting is an abomination.
    redrawing the lines every couple of years in order to ensure one party’s election chances should be illegal, not business-as-usual.

  43. I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections.
    I’m not. Or at least I think there need to be national standards for things like number and distribution of polling places and methods of voting, so voting is no harder for one individual or neighborhood than any other.
    Plus cleek’s point, and paper ballots for an audit trail.

  44. I’m fine with states making their own rules for state elections.
    I’m not. Or at least I think there need to be national standards for things like number and distribution of polling places and methods of voting, so voting is no harder for one individual or neighborhood than any other.
    Plus cleek’s point, and paper ballots for an audit trail.

  45. For the past week my lefty news circles have been screaming blue murder about the Senate health care bill, but it’s gotten very little mainstream+Fox news coverage by comparison.
    Over the weekend there seems to have been a lot of out-and-out lying on the part of GOP & presidential spokesbeasts, saying that the bill won’t gut Medicaid.
    Yet I see widespread reporting that the bill takes health dollars from the poor to lower taxes for the rich. Has this not been said on the major broadcast media?
    I get the feeling that GOP leaders, like their voters, don’t know much more about health care issues than what they hear on Fox, and aren’t actually aware of what’s in this bill and what it does. And that if it passes (which I fear is likely) and then millions of people lose insurance, and thousands of people die, they’ll believe it’s all just the aftershocks of Obamacare — because that’s what FoxNews will tell them.

  46. For the past week my lefty news circles have been screaming blue murder about the Senate health care bill, but it’s gotten very little mainstream+Fox news coverage by comparison.
    Over the weekend there seems to have been a lot of out-and-out lying on the part of GOP & presidential spokesbeasts, saying that the bill won’t gut Medicaid.
    Yet I see widespread reporting that the bill takes health dollars from the poor to lower taxes for the rich. Has this not been said on the major broadcast media?
    I get the feeling that GOP leaders, like their voters, don’t know much more about health care issues than what they hear on Fox, and aren’t actually aware of what’s in this bill and what it does. And that if it passes (which I fear is likely) and then millions of people lose insurance, and thousands of people die, they’ll believe it’s all just the aftershocks of Obamacare — because that’s what FoxNews will tell them.

  47. One of the smartest things we have done in my lifetime in California was take redistricting out of the hands of the legislature. Gave it to a non-partisan group, which has done a quite good job of creating districts that are
    1) balanced in population,
    2) roughly follow communities (i.e. not ones where you have to go thru 3 other districts to drive from one part of the district to another), and
    3) pay no attention to the desire of politicians to advantage a) themselves personally, and b) their party, in shaping districts.
    We still have some districts that would be considered “safe”. But that’s because of clustering by home location by voters. Not because the district was gerrymandered to make it that way.

  48. One of the smartest things we have done in my lifetime in California was take redistricting out of the hands of the legislature. Gave it to a non-partisan group, which has done a quite good job of creating districts that are
    1) balanced in population,
    2) roughly follow communities (i.e. not ones where you have to go thru 3 other districts to drive from one part of the district to another), and
    3) pay no attention to the desire of politicians to advantage a) themselves personally, and b) their party, in shaping districts.
    We still have some districts that would be considered “safe”. But that’s because of clustering by home location by voters. Not because the district was gerrymandered to make it that way.

  49. “Over the weekend there seems to have been a lot of out-and-out lying on the part of GOP & presidential spokesbeasts, saying that the bill won’t gut Medicaid.”
    No, it in does the taxes, mostly, put in place by the ACA, which by the nature of taxes is better for the rich, always. Some people remember it was specifically touted as a tax on the rich but, nonetheless.
    The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states. That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole. “People will die” is hyperbole.
    The assumptions of all these bad outcomes are in direct conflict with russell’s confidence that in his state things would be fine.
    The CBO, the first time, estimated half the states would not ask for waivers of some kind, 31 states have expanded Medicaid, they would be unlikely to ask for a waiver on preexisting conditions. Oh, and everyone has to have a high risk pool to even apply.
    There seems to be a lot of out and out lying but it isn’t from the GOP.
    http://www.factcheck.org/2017/06/preexisting-condition-spin/
    In fact, the GOP is actually having a discussion of the best compromise to move this forward.

  50. “Over the weekend there seems to have been a lot of out-and-out lying on the part of GOP & presidential spokesbeasts, saying that the bill won’t gut Medicaid.”
    No, it in does the taxes, mostly, put in place by the ACA, which by the nature of taxes is better for the rich, always. Some people remember it was specifically touted as a tax on the rich but, nonetheless.
    The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states. That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole. “People will die” is hyperbole.
    The assumptions of all these bad outcomes are in direct conflict with russell’s confidence that in his state things would be fine.
    The CBO, the first time, estimated half the states would not ask for waivers of some kind, 31 states have expanded Medicaid, they would be unlikely to ask for a waiver on preexisting conditions. Oh, and everyone has to have a high risk pool to even apply.
    There seems to be a lot of out and out lying but it isn’t from the GOP.
    http://www.factcheck.org/2017/06/preexisting-condition-spin/
    In fact, the GOP is actually having a discussion of the best compromise to move this forward.

  51. In fact, the GOP is actually having a discussion of the best compromise to move this forward.
    The GOP (in the Senate) is having a discussion on whether they can find something that will simultaneously satisfy the 4 Senators who want the slashes to be harsher (i.e. roll back more of Obamacare) and the 3-4 Senators who object to the slashes being as deep as they are in the current bill. Whether they can square that circle remains to be seen.

  52. In fact, the GOP is actually having a discussion of the best compromise to move this forward.
    The GOP (in the Senate) is having a discussion on whether they can find something that will simultaneously satisfy the 4 Senators who want the slashes to be harsher (i.e. roll back more of Obamacare) and the 3-4 Senators who object to the slashes being as deep as they are in the current bill. Whether they can square that circle remains to be seen.

  53. The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid
    Well, how? Also, is this, in and of itself, a desirable policy outcome? What’s missing here is context. The context is reduced coverage.
    and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states.
    hahaha…like voting rights? Look, if you give the states less money, they will find a way to cut coverage.
    That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole. “People will die” is hyperbole.
    If you reduce coverage, people will needlessly die who otherwise wouldn’t have. This is not hyperbole. This is a fact.
    The CBO, the first time, estimated half the states would not ask for waivers of some kind, 31 states have expanded Medicaid, they would be unlikely to ask for a waiver on preexisting conditions.
    Only half? Some consolation to those left out, eh? As funding is increasingly squeezed, asking for a waiver of some kind will be the rule, not the exception.
    Some shit. Some fan.

  54. The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid
    Well, how? Also, is this, in and of itself, a desirable policy outcome? What’s missing here is context. The context is reduced coverage.
    and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states.
    hahaha…like voting rights? Look, if you give the states less money, they will find a way to cut coverage.
    That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole. “People will die” is hyperbole.
    If you reduce coverage, people will needlessly die who otherwise wouldn’t have. This is not hyperbole. This is a fact.
    The CBO, the first time, estimated half the states would not ask for waivers of some kind, 31 states have expanded Medicaid, they would be unlikely to ask for a waiver on preexisting conditions.
    Only half? Some consolation to those left out, eh? As funding is increasingly squeezed, asking for a waiver of some kind will be the rule, not the exception.
    Some shit. Some fan.

  55. Has this not been said on the major broadcast media?
    NPR has been pushing back against the GOP’s lies. but why should the GOP care? they don’t have to please anyone who doesn’t already love them.
    they’ll believe it’s all just the aftershocks of Obamacare — because that’s what FoxNews will tell them.
    i’m 100% sure that’s the plan. any problems? blame Obama. it’s already perfectly clear that the GOP base, being full of people who happily voted for the idiotic morally-bankrupt prevaricator, will never bother wondering if it’s true.

  56. Has this not been said on the major broadcast media?
    NPR has been pushing back against the GOP’s lies. but why should the GOP care? they don’t have to please anyone who doesn’t already love them.
    they’ll believe it’s all just the aftershocks of Obamacare — because that’s what FoxNews will tell them.
    i’m 100% sure that’s the plan. any problems? blame Obama. it’s already perfectly clear that the GOP base, being full of people who happily voted for the idiotic morally-bankrupt prevaricator, will never bother wondering if it’s true.

  59. “hahaha…like voting rights? Look, if you give the states less money, they will find a way to cut coverage. ”
    I would probably have voted for Kasich. But when you give the states a benefit 100% paid for by the federal government, guess what? They become politically entrenched to retain that because otherwise THEY have to pay for it.
    That is a stupid way to fund healthcare and leads to forever rising costs.
    BTW, block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer. Both have to figure out how to allocate finite resources, but states can do it different based on local circumstance.

  60. “hahaha…like voting rights? Look, if you give the states less money, they will find a way to cut coverage. ”
    I would probably have voted for Kasich. But when you give the states a benefit 100% paid for by the federal government, guess what? They become politically entrenched to retain that because otherwise THEY have to pay for it.
    That is a stupid way to fund healthcare and leads to forever rising costs.
    BTW, block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer. Both have to figure out how to allocate finite resources, but states can do it different based on local circumstance.

  61. “As funding is increasingly squeezed, asking for a waiver of some kind will be the rule, not the exception.”
    So complain to your Governor.

  62. “As funding is increasingly squeezed, asking for a waiver of some kind will be the rule, not the exception.”
    So complain to your Governor.

  63. Marty:
    Not only will the bill actually kill people, the Social Security savings (dead people get no benefits!) is part of the CBO score for the House bill.
    The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states. That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole.
    There will be less money for Medicaid, though it is the sector of American health care where costs are growing slowest. Pushing it back to the states means administrative effort will be duplicated and high-risk pools will be underfunded.
    This is going to look like “gutted” to a lot of people whose lives are on the line. Why doesn’t it seem that way to you?

  64. Marty:
    Not only will the bill actually kill people, the Social Security savings (dead people get no benefits!) is part of the CBO score for the House bill.
    The bill reduces the rate of growth of Medicaid and pushes the responsibility for those people back to the states. That is a fact. “Gutted” is hyperbole.
    There will be less money for Medicaid, though it is the sector of American health care where costs are growing slowest. Pushing it back to the states means administrative effort will be duplicated and high-risk pools will be underfunded.
    This is going to look like “gutted” to a lot of people whose lives are on the line. Why doesn’t it seem that way to you?

  65. “So, complain to your Governor.”
    Thus, the answer to Russell’s question on the other thread: “What’s different in one place or the other?”
    Other answers are “Fuck you!” and “Kiss my republican ass!”

  66. “So, complain to your Governor.”
    Thus, the answer to Russell’s question on the other thread: “What’s different in one place or the other?”
    Other answers are “Fuck you!” and “Kiss my republican ass!”

  67. The assumptions of all these bad outcomes are in direct conflict with russell’s confidence that in his state things would be fine.
    If you live in MA.

  68. The assumptions of all these bad outcomes are in direct conflict with russell’s confidence that in his state things would be fine.
    If you live in MA.

  69. BTW, block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer.
    How so? Block granting is just another way of saying, “You get less. Deal with it.” And just what the heck is “optimum value” in the healthcare context?
    Health care providers already scream bloody murder about low Medicaid reimbursement rates. So what magic is going to come from block (er, reduced funding) grants?
    Choices, for the states, are limited.
    They can increase taxes (not likely).
    They can reduce coverage.
    That’s about it.

  70. BTW, block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer.
    How so? Block granting is just another way of saying, “You get less. Deal with it.” And just what the heck is “optimum value” in the healthcare context?
    Health care providers already scream bloody murder about low Medicaid reimbursement rates. So what magic is going to come from block (er, reduced funding) grants?
    Choices, for the states, are limited.
    They can increase taxes (not likely).
    They can reduce coverage.
    That’s about it.

  71. That is a gruesome touch that SS will save money on the dead suckers and is counted as savings.
    Somalia saves money by leaving the dead lying in the streets, something over which their tribal leaders have been trying to achieve since they were kegging in college.

  72. That is a gruesome touch that SS will save money on the dead suckers and is counted as savings.
    Somalia saves money by leaving the dead lying in the streets, something over which their tribal leaders have been trying to achieve since they were kegging in college.

  73. The article you posted, Doc, quoted 2013 growth rates. I am on my phone(no links available) but that growth rate is significantly higher since then and vastly exceeding estimates.
    I will check and find the latest stats.

  74. The article you posted, Doc, quoted 2013 growth rates. I am on my phone(no links available) but that growth rate is significantly higher since then and vastly exceeding estimates.
    I will check and find the latest stats.

  75. Marty:
    block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer
    That depends on what your definition of “optimum value” is. As Neil Irwin says, the health care bills demonstrate what the political parties really care about:

    Democrats are focused on trying to maximize the number of people who have decent health insurance, and are willing to accept whatever tax increases and arrangements with health insurers and other private interests are needed to make that happen. They seek the broadest possible availability of health care, whatever the cost and political trade-offs it takes to achieve it.
    Republicans are focused on trying to minimize taxes, especially on investment income, and keeping federal subsidies for health care to a minimum. They are willing to accept the wrenching consequences that attaining those goals might have for Americans’ insurance coverage, betting that lower taxes and smaller government will fuel a more vibrant economy.

    Is your “value” controlling costs overall, controlling costs to people who aren’t sick yet, or health care for more Americans? The GOP has made its priorities very clear.

  76. Marty:
    block granting Medicaid is a much better way to achieve optimum value than national single payer
    That depends on what your definition of “optimum value” is. As Neil Irwin says, the health care bills demonstrate what the political parties really care about:

    Democrats are focused on trying to maximize the number of people who have decent health insurance, and are willing to accept whatever tax increases and arrangements with health insurers and other private interests are needed to make that happen. They seek the broadest possible availability of health care, whatever the cost and political trade-offs it takes to achieve it.
    Republicans are focused on trying to minimize taxes, especially on investment income, and keeping federal subsidies for health care to a minimum. They are willing to accept the wrenching consequences that attaining those goals might have for Americans’ insurance coverage, betting that lower taxes and smaller government will fuel a more vibrant economy.

    Is your “value” controlling costs overall, controlling costs to people who aren’t sick yet, or health care for more Americans? The GOP has made its priorities very clear.

  77. In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.

  78. In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.

  79. If I follow all of this, we’re gonna reduce spending by limiting what we send to the states for Medicaid.
    That is somehow going to bend the cost curve down.
    How does that work?
    People are still gonna get sick. When they get sick, they are going to find a way to go to the doctor, even if that means camping out at the ER.
    Docs aren’t going to want to get paid less. I know this from talking to docs.
    Pharma isn’t going to want to get paid less. I know this for about the same reasons that I know the sun comes up in the east.
    So, we trim down funding and… what happens, exactly?
    Maybe somebody has a rabbit they can pull out of a hat, other than that I don’t see this stuff going anywhere good.
    We’re too in love with our own BS, and too in thrall to the magical market pony, to get out of our own way.
    Marty says nobody is going to suffer. Maybe Marty has a rabbit in his hat.

  80. If I follow all of this, we’re gonna reduce spending by limiting what we send to the states for Medicaid.
    That is somehow going to bend the cost curve down.
    How does that work?
    People are still gonna get sick. When they get sick, they are going to find a way to go to the doctor, even if that means camping out at the ER.
    Docs aren’t going to want to get paid less. I know this from talking to docs.
    Pharma isn’t going to want to get paid less. I know this for about the same reasons that I know the sun comes up in the east.
    So, we trim down funding and… what happens, exactly?
    Maybe somebody has a rabbit they can pull out of a hat, other than that I don’t see this stuff going anywhere good.
    We’re too in love with our own BS, and too in thrall to the magical market pony, to get out of our own way.
    Marty says nobody is going to suffer. Maybe Marty has a rabbit in his hat.

  81. I’m just now figuring in the back of an envelope the savings in government pensions that can be achieved if the health conditions of 239 republican reps and 56 republican senators, not to mention an entire White House full of murderers, the entire right wing media crew of jackals and carrion-eaters, the entire right wing citizens united killers, and the entire right wing enclave of academic and think tank sadists take a sudden, simultaneous, and catastrophic turn towards make-shift morgues.

  82. I’m just now figuring in the back of an envelope the savings in government pensions that can be achieved if the health conditions of 239 republican reps and 56 republican senators, not to mention an entire White House full of murderers, the entire right wing media crew of jackals and carrion-eaters, the entire right wing citizens united killers, and the entire right wing enclave of academic and think tank sadists take a sudden, simultaneous, and catastrophic turn towards make-shift morgues.

  83. Marty:
    Medicaid spending *totals* have grown because of Medicaid expansion. As far as I can tell, cost per enrollee has grown much, much more slowly than for other parts of the health care system.
    If the goal was actually to control overall health care costs, get more people on Medicaid.
    Contra your statements, single-payer controls costs much better than other systems. This is because only single-or-very-few-payer systems have bargaining power with drug companies, hospitals, & other providers.
    Yet even the AMA (which often sides with providers) says the Senate bill will harm people. People who aren’t both rich and healthy, that is.

  84. Marty:
    Medicaid spending *totals* have grown because of Medicaid expansion. As far as I can tell, cost per enrollee has grown much, much more slowly than for other parts of the health care system.
    If the goal was actually to control overall health care costs, get more people on Medicaid.
    Contra your statements, single-payer controls costs much better than other systems. This is because only single-or-very-few-payer systems have bargaining power with drug companies, hospitals, & other providers.
    Yet even the AMA (which often sides with providers) says the Senate bill will harm people. People who aren’t both rich and healthy, that is.

  85. In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.
    There appear to be ways to do this as the program is currently structured. So block grants bring nothing.

  86. In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.
    There appear to be ways to do this as the program is currently structured. So block grants bring nothing.

  87. “They can increase taxes (not likely).”
    Sadists norquist and company have made the most inroads in state and local jurisdictions, precisely to ready themselves to gut the social safety nets as they are capped to the states responsibilities.
    “In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.”
    The states have been free to house the homeless on their own ticket since the founding, but most refuse to do so.
    Utah, I understand, until recently, is an exception. The VA, via its unelected bureaucrats in DC (the ones brave enough to risk having their heads shot off) has done yeoman work managing and finding homes for the homeless veteran population across the country in recent years.

  88. “They can increase taxes (not likely).”
    Sadists norquist and company have made the most inroads in state and local jurisdictions, precisely to ready themselves to gut the social safety nets as they are capped to the states responsibilities.
    “In some states, the homeless are a significant drain on Medicaid. If through block grants, those states could use Medicaid funds for housing, there could be a net reduction in cost.”
    The states have been free to house the homeless on their own ticket since the founding, but most refuse to do so.
    Utah, I understand, until recently, is an exception. The VA, via its unelected bureaucrats in DC (the ones brave enough to risk having their heads shot off) has done yeoman work managing and finding homes for the homeless veteran population across the country in recent years.

  89. Marty says nobody is going to suffer. Maybe Marty has a rabbit in his hat.
    But, but . . . President Trump says he wants a bill that will be better for everybody. One which won’t hurt anyone. And he’s President, so you have to believe he will get what he wants. After all, his party controls Congress. Right? Right?

  90. Marty says nobody is going to suffer. Maybe Marty has a rabbit in his hat.
    But, but . . . President Trump says he wants a bill that will be better for everybody. One which won’t hurt anyone. And he’s President, so you have to believe he will get what he wants. After all, his party controls Congress. Right? Right?

  95. Possibly of interest.
    This too, possibly.
    Among the reasons that health care costs a lot in the US is that we make few intelligent efforts to control the cost. Cost control here amounts to badgering patients to make sure they really, really, really need whatever it is they think they need, and/or just capping expenditures and leaving it to either providers or patients to figure it out.
    Block-granting federal money to the states can make the feds feel all proud of themselves for “doing something” about the cost of care, but it’s basically just passing the hot potato off to somebody else.
    Some states may be more creative or innovative about how they go about things, and so might come up with better outcomes for a given amount of $$$. Some states have more resources to bring to the table, and so they will also not suffer too much.
    But a lot of folks will suffer, because their state governments aren’t that clever, or because their state doesn’t have the same level of resources to work with.
    Folks can “complain to their governors”, but they’ll still be SOL.
    What I think is going to happen is that the (R)’s will figure out some way to get their tax cut, come hell or high water, and whatever has to shift to accommodate is going to by god shift.
    If that means there are fewer resources in your state to help people who are hard up, then that’s what’s going to happen.
    If you don’t like it, you’re going to have to vote yourself a new state legislature, because the (R)’s in DC are washing their hands of you.
    If they don’t get it done this time around, they’ll try and try again. They’ve wanted this for decades, and this is their best shot. They’re gonna get it or die trying.
    If we actually want to reduce costs, there are ways to do it. We don’t give a crap if we reduce costs or not, we just don’t want to pay the bill.
    The hot potato will be passed. If not this week, some other time, and sooner rather than later.

  96. Possibly of interest.
    This too, possibly.
    Among the reasons that health care costs a lot in the US is that we make few intelligent efforts to control the cost. Cost control here amounts to badgering patients to make sure they really, really, really need whatever it is they think they need, and/or just capping expenditures and leaving it to either providers or patients to figure it out.
    Block-granting federal money to the states can make the feds feel all proud of themselves for “doing something” about the cost of care, but it’s basically just passing the hot potato off to somebody else.
    Some states may be more creative or innovative about how they go about things, and so might come up with better outcomes for a given amount of $$$. Some states have more resources to bring to the table, and so they will also not suffer too much.
    But a lot of folks will suffer, because their state governments aren’t that clever, or because their state doesn’t have the same level of resources to work with.
    Folks can “complain to their governors”, but they’ll still be SOL.
    What I think is going to happen is that the (R)’s will figure out some way to get their tax cut, come hell or high water, and whatever has to shift to accommodate is going to by god shift.
    If that means there are fewer resources in your state to help people who are hard up, then that’s what’s going to happen.
    If you don’t like it, you’re going to have to vote yourself a new state legislature, because the (R)’s in DC are washing their hands of you.
    If they don’t get it done this time around, they’ll try and try again. They’ve wanted this for decades, and this is their best shot. They’re gonna get it or die trying.
    If we actually want to reduce costs, there are ways to do it. We don’t give a crap if we reduce costs or not, we just don’t want to pay the bill.
    The hot potato will be passed. If not this week, some other time, and sooner rather than later.

  97. In red states, the block-granted Medicaid funds will be raided by republican legislatures and governors to cut taxes on the 1%.

  98. In red states, the block-granted Medicaid funds will be raided by republican legislatures and governors to cut taxes on the 1%.

  105. via The American Conservative:
    https://harpers.org/archive/2017/07/the-reichstag-fire-next-time/
    Don’t think republican vermin wouldn’t stage a state of emergency to renege on the debt, cut taxes, and repeal Obamacare.
    Fall would be good timing, I’m guessing.
    I have a new favorite musician, despite the fact that I have yet to hear a note of his music:
    Father John Misty. A quote:
    “Do we think our hilarious tyrant is going to be met with a hilarious revolution led by hilarious revolutionaries and the the whole thing is going to be, like, entertaining as fuck the whole time? I always thought that it was going to look way more sophisticated than this when evil happened?”
    Me:
    People always expect Hitler when no one expects the Spanish Inquisition. Sometimes it’s just a passel of glib comedians in cheap suits who come to kill us.

  106. via The American Conservative:
    https://harpers.org/archive/2017/07/the-reichstag-fire-next-time/
    Don’t think republican vermin wouldn’t stage a state of emergency to renege on the debt, cut taxes, and repeal Obamacare.
    Fall would be good timing, I’m guessing.
    I have a new favorite musician, despite the fact that I have yet to hear a note of his music:
    Father John Misty. A quote:
    “Do we think our hilarious tyrant is going to be met with a hilarious revolution led by hilarious revolutionaries and the the whole thing is going to be, like, entertaining as fuck the whole time? I always thought that it was going to look way more sophisticated than this when evil happened?”
    Me:
    People always expect Hitler when no one expects the Spanish Inquisition. Sometimes it’s just a passel of glib comedians in cheap suits who come to kill us.

  109. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-cbo-score-senate-health-bill-20170626-story.html
    Let’s say you have a massive heart attack while playing Twister on the ground plaque straddling the four corners area where state lines for Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona intersect.
    Which way would you fall? Or more specifically, would a conservative pass out into the state with the cheapest coverage and a liberal pass out into the state with the most coverage?
    Still struggling with Russell’s question about the difference in being sick from state to state.
    I suppose if melanoma was involved it would be an equally serious, expensive and deadly disease for all of one states’ citizens, but in another it might be a serious, expensive, and deadly disease for those covered, but a punchline (take my melanoma .. please!) when the undeserving weren’t covered.

  110. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-cbo-score-senate-health-bill-20170626-story.html
    Let’s say you have a massive heart attack while playing Twister on the ground plaque straddling the four corners area where state lines for Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona intersect.
    Which way would you fall? Or more specifically, would a conservative pass out into the state with the cheapest coverage and a liberal pass out into the state with the most coverage?
    Still struggling with Russell’s question about the difference in being sick from state to state.
    I suppose if melanoma was involved it would be an equally serious, expensive and deadly disease for all of one states’ citizens, but in another it might be a serious, expensive, and deadly disease for those covered, but a punchline (take my melanoma .. please!) when the undeserving weren’t covered.

  111. More:
    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/26/1675485/-Senators-react-to-the-Trumpcare-bill-CBO-confirms-this-thing-is-a-sandwich
    I don’t believe the CBO addressed the money saved by the lack of coverage of dead Americans no longer receiving SS benefits, although I understand Chicago has carved out a special exception for their dead to continue coverage.
    this will be a “yeah, but” thing pointed by republicans on next Sunday’s talk shows.
    “yeah, but, you haven’t considered the financial upside on the deficit from savings on the undeserving dead, by which we mean the deserving dead who are enjoying the fruits of freedom in America.”
    Mitch (potato famine) Mulvaney would point out that the undeserving dead and the living who are living undedervedly are providing a form of charity to the 1% whose taxes have been cut.
    To which they ask: “Will I be able to take a charitable deduction for that on my taxes?”
    “No. We’re going to simplify taxes as well.”

  112. More:
    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/6/26/1675485/-Senators-react-to-the-Trumpcare-bill-CBO-confirms-this-thing-is-a-sandwich
    I don’t believe the CBO addressed the money saved by the lack of coverage of dead Americans no longer receiving SS benefits, although I understand Chicago has carved out a special exception for their dead to continue coverage.
    this will be a “yeah, but” thing pointed by republicans on next Sunday’s talk shows.
    “yeah, but, you haven’t considered the financial upside on the deficit from savings on the undeserving dead, by which we mean the deserving dead who are enjoying the fruits of freedom in America.”
    Mitch (potato famine) Mulvaney would point out that the undeserving dead and the living who are living undedervedly are providing a form of charity to the 1% whose taxes have been cut.
    To which they ask: “Will I be able to take a charitable deduction for that on my taxes?”
    “No. We’re going to simplify taxes as well.”

  117. They’re gonna get it or die trying.
    To wit
    Posted by: hairshirthedonist | June 26, 2017 at 03:59 PM
    Obviously, if we block granted political donations, politicians would come up with inventive ways to get elected at optimum value to society.
    Take my word for it. Obviously.

  118. They’re gonna get it or die trying.
    To wit
    Posted by: hairshirthedonist | June 26, 2017 at 03:59 PM
    Obviously, if we block granted political donations, politicians would come up with inventive ways to get elected at optimum value to society.
    Take my word for it. Obviously.

  121. I don’t believe the CBO addressed the money saved by the lack of coverage of dead Americans no longer receiving SS benefits, although I understand Chicago has carved out a special exception for their dead to continue coverage.
    Now Count, you know this is just plain silly. Obama is from Chicago. So no way it gets any kind of exception whatsoever!

  122. I don’t believe the CBO addressed the money saved by the lack of coverage of dead Americans no longer receiving SS benefits, although I understand Chicago has carved out a special exception for their dead to continue coverage.
    Now Count, you know this is just plain silly. Obama is from Chicago. So no way it gets any kind of exception whatsoever!

  125. Remember how I was saying that we shouldn’t vilify the rich? Well, it depends on which rich.
    “According to Forbes’ estimate, Chuck and Dave have a net worth of $96.6 billion. The question that most interests me is why two men whose combined wealth is greater than the annual gross domestic product of two-thirds of the world’s sovereign nations (note: not hyperbole) are so obsessed with protecting and expanding the wealth and power of a national and global plutocracy that has already achieved obscene levels of both.’
    And this: “At a weekend event with conservative donors, top aides to Charles Koch, the billionaire energy magnate, said the Senate bill does not go far enough to dismantle former President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law, also known as Obamacare.”
    Okay, I’ll support a war on the Koch brothers.

  126. Remember how I was saying that we shouldn’t vilify the rich? Well, it depends on which rich.
    “According to Forbes’ estimate, Chuck and Dave have a net worth of $96.6 billion. The question that most interests me is why two men whose combined wealth is greater than the annual gross domestic product of two-thirds of the world’s sovereign nations (note: not hyperbole) are so obsessed with protecting and expanding the wealth and power of a national and global plutocracy that has already achieved obscene levels of both.’
    And this: “At a weekend event with conservative donors, top aides to Charles Koch, the billionaire energy magnate, said the Senate bill does not go far enough to dismantle former President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare law, also known as Obamacare.”
    Okay, I’ll support a war on the Koch brothers.

  127. It’s just ever so much easier to be an extreme libertarian if you are so rich that you never need worry your little head about the government doing something for you. (Of course, you have to turn a blind eye to all the government programs which made your wealth possible in the first place.)

  128. It’s just ever so much easier to be an extreme libertarian if you are so rich that you never need worry your little head about the government doing something for you. (Of course, you have to turn a blind eye to all the government programs which made your wealth possible in the first place.)

  131. It’s just ever so much easier to be an extreme libertarian if you are so rich that you never need worry your little head about the government doing something for you.
    If I had $96.6 billion, maybe I’d be bored with fabulous vacations, yummy food, anything else I wanted, and the only think I could think of left to do, having done it all, and being so bored, would be to stick it to the poor. I hope I wouldn’t be doing that. JFC. (Oh, right, they’re Christians. WWJD? Would he really be doing that?)

  132. It’s just ever so much easier to be an extreme libertarian if you are so rich that you never need worry your little head about the government doing something for you.
    If I had $96.6 billion, maybe I’d be bored with fabulous vacations, yummy food, anything else I wanted, and the only think I could think of left to do, having done it all, and being so bored, would be to stick it to the poor. I hope I wouldn’t be doing that. JFC. (Oh, right, they’re Christians. WWJD? Would he really be doing that?)

  133. If I had $96.6 billion, maybe I’d be bored with fabulous vacations, yummy food, anything else I wanted, and the only think I could think of left to do, having done it all, and being so bored, would be to stick it to the poor.
    I think you’re missing the point. They aren’t (at least in their minds) “sticking it to the poor.” They’re just trying to advance an ideology that they devoutly believe in. It happens to be one which is, as I said, far easier to believe if you are filthy rich (or a college student on a full mommy/daddy scholarship).
    But there really isn’t any malice in it. Just lack of empathy — or maybe lack of imagination, to realize how the rest of the world lives.

  134. If I had $96.6 billion, maybe I’d be bored with fabulous vacations, yummy food, anything else I wanted, and the only think I could think of left to do, having done it all, and being so bored, would be to stick it to the poor.
    I think you’re missing the point. They aren’t (at least in their minds) “sticking it to the poor.” They’re just trying to advance an ideology that they devoutly believe in. It happens to be one which is, as I said, far easier to believe if you are filthy rich (or a college student on a full mommy/daddy scholarship).
    But there really isn’t any malice in it. Just lack of empathy — or maybe lack of imagination, to realize how the rest of the world lives.

  135. But there really isn’t any malice in it. Just lack of empathy — or maybe lack of imagination, to realize how the rest of the world lives.
    Yeah, maybe. I still can’t look at people who see the world in this way and feel any sense of kindness towards them. Although, I’ve been really nice to a lot of A@@holes when the chips were down for them, so I probably would.
    That’s probably how this crap happens. People who have a moral compass give other people the benefit of “no malice” until they are, themselves, f’d.

  136. But there really isn’t any malice in it. Just lack of empathy — or maybe lack of imagination, to realize how the rest of the world lives.
    Yeah, maybe. I still can’t look at people who see the world in this way and feel any sense of kindness towards them. Although, I’ve been really nice to a lot of A@@holes when the chips were down for them, so I probably would.
    That’s probably how this crap happens. People who have a moral compass give other people the benefit of “no malice” until they are, themselves, f’d.

  137. Those numbers, except for being at 350% instead of at 400% are better than it is now.
    Just to be clear, you understand that those numbers are the difference between what the premium and/or tax credit would be under ACA vs Senat (R) plan, right?
    So, if you’re in FL, you’re not looking at $5K, you’re looking at $5K *more*.
    If I’m reading it all right.
    I’m curious why MA (and some other states) don’t show up.

  138. Those numbers, except for being at 350% instead of at 400% are better than it is now.
    Just to be clear, you understand that those numbers are the difference between what the premium and/or tax credit would be under ACA vs Senat (R) plan, right?
    So, if you’re in FL, you’re not looking at $5K, you’re looking at $5K *more*.
    If I’m reading it all right.
    I’m curious why MA (and some other states) don’t show up.

  139. Also – from what I can see, this bill is basically:
    (a) cut $$$ to Medicaid
    (b) give it to rich people
    If I’m missing something here, please lemme know
    Making somebody else pay doesn’t make the cost go down. Handing the hot potato from the feds to the states doesn’t make the costs go down. Handing the hot potato from the states to patients doesn’t make the costs go down.
    The reasons why health care costs a lot in this country don’t have all that much to do with who pays.
    If you think some guy in Pierre SD, or Jefferson City MO, or Boston freaking MA for that matter, has a better understanding of how to deal with and pay for public health than some guy in DC, I suspect you are in for a surprise.
    Diabetes and Alzheimers and cancer and god knows what are not that much different in SD and FL and MA.
    What a fucking mess. Just the cost of having the whole freaking insurance industry stop on a dime and make a new plan every time the majority in Congress changes probably costs us more than everything we spend on Medicaid.
    We may be the stupidest country on earth. OK, North Korea is stupider, we’re second.

  140. Also – from what I can see, this bill is basically:
    (a) cut $$$ to Medicaid
    (b) give it to rich people
    If I’m missing something here, please lemme know
    Making somebody else pay doesn’t make the cost go down. Handing the hot potato from the feds to the states doesn’t make the costs go down. Handing the hot potato from the states to patients doesn’t make the costs go down.
    The reasons why health care costs a lot in this country don’t have all that much to do with who pays.
    If you think some guy in Pierre SD, or Jefferson City MO, or Boston freaking MA for that matter, has a better understanding of how to deal with and pay for public health than some guy in DC, I suspect you are in for a surprise.
    Diabetes and Alzheimers and cancer and god knows what are not that much different in SD and FL and MA.
    What a fucking mess. Just the cost of having the whole freaking insurance industry stop on a dime and make a new plan every time the majority in Congress changes probably costs us more than everything we spend on Medicaid.
    We may be the stupidest country on earth. OK, North Korea is stupider, we’re second.

  141. I understand perfectly russell, but to be clear, the difference is most of what the cost is. Below 350% you get subsidies and discounted plans. If you pick the full subsidy, meaning if you are sure you won’t make more, you pay about 3k or less for a Silver plan.
    But the difference is now you get all that uptick at 350% rather than 400% but the uptick is a little smaller, it seems from my memory. Maybe because the initial subsidy is a little less, not sure.
    But thats being presented like its new. I call bs. It’s not a huge change.

  142. I understand perfectly russell, but to be clear, the difference is most of what the cost is. Below 350% you get subsidies and discounted plans. If you pick the full subsidy, meaning if you are sure you won’t make more, you pay about 3k or less for a Silver plan.
    But the difference is now you get all that uptick at 350% rather than 400% but the uptick is a little smaller, it seems from my memory. Maybe because the initial subsidy is a little less, not sure.
    But thats being presented like its new. I call bs. It’s not a huge change.

  143. And btw, the reason I think it’s less is my difference in Fl in 2016 was 5k, but I only took half the subsidy because I was afraid I would end up with too much income for the full subsidy. A contract in Dec put me over 400% and I owed it all.

  144. And btw, the reason I think it’s less is my difference in Fl in 2016 was 5k, but I only took half the subsidy because I was afraid I would end up with too much income for the full subsidy. A contract in Dec put me over 400% and I owed it all.

  145. If you pick the full subsidy, meaning if you are sure you won’t make more, you pay about 3k or less for a Silver plan.
    If I’m not mistaken, to qualify for a full subsidy you have to be at or below the federal poverty level.
    For an individual, that is about $12K. For a family of four, it’s about twice that.
    If you’re an individual, $3K is a quarter of your annual income. For health insurance. Which probably also has co-pays, deductibles, etc.
    If you’re a household of four, it’s an eight of your total annual income, with the same caveats.
    This sucks.

  146. If you pick the full subsidy, meaning if you are sure you won’t make more, you pay about 3k or less for a Silver plan.
    If I’m not mistaken, to qualify for a full subsidy you have to be at or below the federal poverty level.
    For an individual, that is about $12K. For a family of four, it’s about twice that.
    If you’re an individual, $3K is a quarter of your annual income. For health insurance. Which probably also has co-pays, deductibles, etc.
    If you’re a household of four, it’s an eight of your total annual income, with the same caveats.
    This sucks.

  147. Under 138% you don’t get subsidy, you get Meficaid,or if you are in a no expansion state you get to have NO insurance with no penalty.
    Thats a problem I can get worked up about. They all lie, or everyone would be covered.
    The CBO says that poor people won’t buy plans because they have deductibles that are too big, you mean 6-12k? Like right now?
    I’ll entertain the 22 million number when they score the ACA. Because nothing they say will cause the increase in uninsured is not applicable to what we have now. Except Medicaid won’t grow out of control.

  148. Under 138% you don’t get subsidy, you get Meficaid,or if you are in a no expansion state you get to have NO insurance with no penalty.
    Thats a problem I can get worked up about. They all lie, or everyone would be covered.
    The CBO says that poor people won’t buy plans because they have deductibles that are too big, you mean 6-12k? Like right now?
    I’ll entertain the 22 million number when they score the ACA. Because nothing they say will cause the increase in uninsured is not applicable to what we have now. Except Medicaid won’t grow out of control.

  151. this:
    “What a fucking mess. Just the cost of having the whole freaking insurance industry stop on a dime and make a new plan every time the majority in Congress changes probably costs us more than everything we spend on Medicaid.”
    It’s like when Americans decide to provide the world with free trade and spend years negotiating treaties to provide such, and then, on a turn of a dime because of bullshit whims, decide we don’t like the arrangement.
    Never trust a pigfucking American, never shake hands on a deal with a pigfucking American, never turn your back on a pigfucking American, NEVER keep the safety on in the presence of a pigfucking American, because pigfucking Americans are thinking at all times how to fuck the guy they signed the deal with.
    trump IS the apotheosis of pigfucking America.

  152. this:
    “What a fucking mess. Just the cost of having the whole freaking insurance industry stop on a dime and make a new plan every time the majority in Congress changes probably costs us more than everything we spend on Medicaid.”
    It’s like when Americans decide to provide the world with free trade and spend years negotiating treaties to provide such, and then, on a turn of a dime because of bullshit whims, decide we don’t like the arrangement.
    Never trust a pigfucking American, never shake hands on a deal with a pigfucking American, never turn your back on a pigfucking American, NEVER keep the safety on in the presence of a pigfucking American, because pigfucking Americans are thinking at all times how to fuck the guy they signed the deal with.
    trump IS the apotheosis of pigfucking America.

  153. We may be the stupidest country on earth. OK, North Korea is stupider, we’re second.
    Seconded. I’m not even sure we’re second anymore. Certainly if you concocted some type of amalgam of stupidity to the ability to do damage to the rest of the world, there would be no contest.

  154. We may be the stupidest country on earth. OK, North Korea is stupider, we’re second.
    Seconded. I’m not even sure we’re second anymore. Certainly if you concocted some type of amalgam of stupidity to the ability to do damage to the rest of the world, there would be no contest.

  157. For deliberately doing damage to our own people, we currently rank behind North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Venezuela. At least.
    But definitely in the top 10. And making a serious effort to move up to the top 5.

  158. For deliberately doing damage to our own people, we currently rank behind North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Venezuela. At least.
    But definitely in the top 10. And making a serious effort to move up to the top 5.

  163. “Is she … roomy in the hips?” will be the first question asked at the new Unplanned Parenthood groping clinics Christian repubicans start up under the new healthcare law.
    Second question: Is it true you have a pussy? Doctor trump and Nurse Ryan will be along in a minute.

  164. “Is she … roomy in the hips?” will be the first question asked at the new Unplanned Parenthood groping clinics Christian repubicans start up under the new healthcare law.
    Second question: Is it true you have a pussy? Doctor trump and Nurse Ryan will be along in a minute.

  169. Even for those of us inured to the effects of right-wing propaganda, it is bizarre to watch a party attempt to carry out a major welfare-state rollback while fervently insisting the welfare state will not be rolled back a single inch.

    not so bizarre.
    this is, after all, the party of Family Values who made itself into the party of the Lying Bankrupt Adulterer in the span of about two months.

  170. Even for those of us inured to the effects of right-wing propaganda, it is bizarre to watch a party attempt to carry out a major welfare-state rollback while fervently insisting the welfare state will not be rolled back a single inch.

    not so bizarre.
    this is, after all, the party of Family Values who made itself into the party of the Lying Bankrupt Adulterer in the span of about two months.

  171. Under 138% you don’t get subsidy, you get Meficaid,or if you are in a no expansion state you get to have NO insurance with no penalty.
    138% of FPL for a family of 4 is right about $34K.
    half the population has a household income of about $50k or less.
    something like 20 states opted out of expansion. all of the southeast, the 100th meridian states except ND, mpuntain west except CO, MO, and ME.
    so i guess those folks need to talk to their governors.
    i get that OCare sucks for you, but i’m not seeing an improvement here, even for you. for a lot of folks, this bill means no coverage
    you get your tax cut, though.

  172. Under 138% you don’t get subsidy, you get Meficaid,or if you are in a no expansion state you get to have NO insurance with no penalty.
    138% of FPL for a family of 4 is right about $34K.
    half the population has a household income of about $50k or less.
    something like 20 states opted out of expansion. all of the southeast, the 100th meridian states except ND, mpuntain west except CO, MO, and ME.
    so i guess those folks need to talk to their governors.
    i get that OCare sucks for you, but i’m not seeing an improvement here, even for you. for a lot of folks, this bill means no coverage
    you get your tax cut, though.

  173. for a lot of folks, this bill means no coverage
    for 52 million folks, in fact.
    but they’ll get trickled-upon. lucky duckies, each and everyone.

  174. for a lot of folks, this bill means no coverage
    for 52 million folks, in fact.
    but they’ll get trickled-upon. lucky duckies, each and everyone.

  179. Of us you miss the part where 52 million plus will not have health care under the current law?
    the 52 million is the GOP plan. that’s total uninsured after 10 years, according to the CBO. that’s 22,000,000 more than continuing the ACA as-is.

  180. Of us you miss the part where 52 million plus will not have health care under the current law?
    the 52 million is the GOP plan. that’s total uninsured after 10 years, according to the CBO. that’s 22,000,000 more than continuing the ACA as-is.

  181. the GOP is not capable of governing because they’ve convinced themselves that cutting taxes is the legislature’s only legitimate function.

  182. the GOP is not capable of governing because they’ve convinced themselves that cutting taxes is the legislature’s only legitimate function.

  187. the GOP is not capable of governing because they’ve convinced themselves that cutting taxes is the legislature’s only legitimate function.
    You left out expanding the military. They don’t usually get around to passing a budget, so they actually end up shrinking it due to sequestration. But they think it is a legitimate function.

  188. the GOP is not capable of governing because they’ve convinced themselves that cutting taxes is the legislature’s only legitimate function.
    You left out expanding the military. They don’t usually get around to passing a budget, so they actually end up shrinking it due to sequestration. But they think it is a legitimate function.

  197. No, the 22m is the difference in today and then if it’s enacted. It is not a comparison to then under the current plan.

  198. No, the 22m is the difference in today and then if it’s enacted. It is not a comparison to then under the current plan.

  199. A point of interest in the NY Magazine article that cleek cites is the difference in the actuarial value of what we have now, vs what the Senate bill would deliver. The only person I see talking about that is David Anderson over on Balloon Juice.
    Also noted by Anderson is what appears to be a relaxing or removal of the maximum loss ratio – the percentage of revenues that insurers are required to spend on actually funding health care for the insureds.
    I really don’t see how this ends up anyplace other than people being worse off.
    That, and a tax cut.

  200. A point of interest in the NY Magazine article that cleek cites is the difference in the actuarial value of what we have now, vs what the Senate bill would deliver. The only person I see talking about that is David Anderson over on Balloon Juice.
    Also noted by Anderson is what appears to be a relaxing or removal of the maximum loss ratio – the percentage of revenues that insurers are required to spend on actually funding health care for the insureds.
    I really don’t see how this ends up anyplace other than people being worse off.
    That, and a tax cut.

  201. No, the 22m is the difference in today and then if it’s enacted. It is not a comparison to then under the current plan.
    i’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. the article is clear about what it’s comparing:

    And on March 13, CBO issued another, much-anticipated projection of the Obamacare repeal bill being considered by the Republican-controlled House. CBO estimated that under the GOP’s American Health Care Act, 14 million fewer people would have health insurance next year than under current law, and that number would rise to 24 million in 2026.
    “In 2026, an estimated 52 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law,” CBO said.

    the numbers change slightly for the Senate plan.

    The budget office projects that by 2026, 49 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million people if the current law remained in effect. (The total increase is 22 million due to rounding.)

    there’s a pretty graph on the NYT page, so you can see what they’re talking about.

  202. No, the 22m is the difference in today and then if it’s enacted. It is not a comparison to then under the current plan.
    i’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. the article is clear about what it’s comparing:

    And on March 13, CBO issued another, much-anticipated projection of the Obamacare repeal bill being considered by the Republican-controlled House. CBO estimated that under the GOP’s American Health Care Act, 14 million fewer people would have health insurance next year than under current law, and that number would rise to 24 million in 2026.
    “In 2026, an estimated 52 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million who would lack insurance that year under current law,” CBO said.

    the numbers change slightly for the Senate plan.

    The budget office projects that by 2026, 49 million people would be uninsured, compared with 28 million people if the current law remained in effect. (The total increase is 22 million due to rounding.)

    there’s a pretty graph on the NYT page, so you can see what they’re talking about.

  203. A discussion of actuarial value.
    The ACA has a benchmark of federal support up to 70% of actuarial value.
    The (R) Senate bill has a benchmark of 58%.
    Subtract that number from 100, and that’s the percentage of total cost of care that the insured pays.
    More discussion from the commies at Business Insider.

  204. A discussion of actuarial value.
    The ACA has a benchmark of federal support up to 70% of actuarial value.
    The (R) Senate bill has a benchmark of 58%.
    Subtract that number from 100, and that’s the percentage of total cost of care that the insured pays.
    More discussion from the commies at Business Insider.

  205. Marty:
    Lemme see if I can embed this image (from 538):

    This is what we’re talking about. The Obamacare baseline is 28M uninsured, which Dems agree is too high. Most of that is due to states refusing to expand Medicaid, and other forms of GOP sabotage.
    Under the Senate bill, the uninsurance rate would go back to approximately the pre-ACA status quo. Approximately 20M people would lose their insurance, 15M of them in a single year.
    Is this clear to you now?
    Have your news sources been telling you this, but you haven’t understood them? Or have they not been saying this clearly?
    If the news sources you follow haven’t given you this information, you need better news sources. If they’ve been contradicting this, you need to examine your choices and think about why you’re believing people who are lying to you.

  206. Marty:
    Lemme see if I can embed this image (from 538):

    This is what we’re talking about. The Obamacare baseline is 28M uninsured, which Dems agree is too high. Most of that is due to states refusing to expand Medicaid, and other forms of GOP sabotage.
    Under the Senate bill, the uninsurance rate would go back to approximately the pre-ACA status quo. Approximately 20M people would lose their insurance, 15M of them in a single year.
    Is this clear to you now?
    Have your news sources been telling you this, but you haven’t understood them? Or have they not been saying this clearly?
    If the news sources you follow haven’t given you this information, you need better news sources. If they’ve been contradicting this, you need to examine your choices and think about why you’re believing people who are lying to you.

  207. If the news sources you follow haven’t given you this information, you need better news sources. If they’ve been contradicting this, you need to examine your choices and think about why you’re believing people who are lying to you.
    Thank you Doctor Science. I’m afraid that this needs to be said to people over and over. It’s really the basis of our problem.

  208. If the news sources you follow haven’t given you this information, you need better news sources. If they’ve been contradicting this, you need to examine your choices and think about why you’re believing people who are lying to you.
    Thank you Doctor Science. I’m afraid that this needs to be said to people over and over. It’s really the basis of our problem.

  209. “Under the Senate bill, the uninsurance rate would go back to approximately the pre-ACA status quo. Approximately 20M people would lose their insurance, 15M of them in a single year.”
    It has always been clear to me. But the CBO has to assume that the current law continues to work the way it is today. Which it is clearly not and wont. The CBO doesn’t assess what the impact of doing nothing is.
    They also cant assume any change in policy at the state level, so they have to assume the dollars that are capped automatically cap signups. How two faced would it be if the Governors of all those states that complain about this just did nothing and didn’t get the money to cover their state.
    The point is that the CBO is NOT analyzing whether the current assumptions under current law are correct or not, they are REQUIRED to assume they are. Thus a flat line on the graph for Obamacare. The second most unrealistic part of the assessment.

  210. “Under the Senate bill, the uninsurance rate would go back to approximately the pre-ACA status quo. Approximately 20M people would lose their insurance, 15M of them in a single year.”
    It has always been clear to me. But the CBO has to assume that the current law continues to work the way it is today. Which it is clearly not and wont. The CBO doesn’t assess what the impact of doing nothing is.
    They also cant assume any change in policy at the state level, so they have to assume the dollars that are capped automatically cap signups. How two faced would it be if the Governors of all those states that complain about this just did nothing and didn’t get the money to cover their state.
    The point is that the CBO is NOT analyzing whether the current assumptions under current law are correct or not, they are REQUIRED to assume they are. Thus a flat line on the graph for Obamacare. The second most unrealistic part of the assessment.

  213. instead of the CBO, who should we use to assess the impact of a policy that reaches far and deep into 18% of the US economy?
    if you have a better estimate, show your work.

  214. instead of the CBO, who should we use to assess the impact of a policy that reaches far and deep into 18% of the US economy?
    if you have a better estimate, show your work.

  217. Marty:
    CBO has to assume that the current law continues to work the way it is today. Which it is clearly not and wont. The CBO doesn’t assess what the impact of doing nothing is.
    Do you mean because “Obamacare is collapsing”? I can find no graph from anyone projecting that this so-called collapse will lead to an increase in the number of uninsured (which is the metric we’re discussing). Link or take it back.
    Also: Obamacare is not “collapsing”. Where it is running into trouble, it’s because the GOP is undermining it.
    Again, if people are telling you that Obamacare is “collapsing” or “imploding”, they are ignorant and/or lying to you.

  218. Marty:
    CBO has to assume that the current law continues to work the way it is today. Which it is clearly not and wont. The CBO doesn’t assess what the impact of doing nothing is.
    Do you mean because “Obamacare is collapsing”? I can find no graph from anyone projecting that this so-called collapse will lead to an increase in the number of uninsured (which is the metric we’re discussing). Link or take it back.
    Also: Obamacare is not “collapsing”. Where it is running into trouble, it’s because the GOP is undermining it.
    Again, if people are telling you that Obamacare is “collapsing” or “imploding”, they are ignorant and/or lying to you.

  219. hsh, It is, hopefully just more clearly. It is comparing what will happen with essentially today, because it doesn’t assume any change in results from todays policies.
    That is always a CBO scoring issue, both sides don’t like it when it is their change it is analyzing. It is a good place to start in assessing changes, but it is rarely a good ending point.

  220. hsh, It is, hopefully just more clearly. It is comparing what will happen with essentially today, because it doesn’t assume any change in results from todays policies.
    That is always a CBO scoring issue, both sides don’t like it when it is their change it is analyzing. It is a good place to start in assessing changes, but it is rarely a good ending point.

  221. It is comparing what will happen with essentially today, because it doesn’t assume any change in results from todays policies.
    the CBO says that the Senate bill will cause 15M people will lose insurance in 2018.
    are you expecting the GOP to put out another health care law (which the CBO doesn’t know about) to fix this, in the next 6 months?

  222. It is comparing what will happen with essentially today, because it doesn’t assume any change in results from todays policies.
    the CBO says that the Senate bill will cause 15M people will lose insurance in 2018.
    are you expecting the GOP to put out another health care law (which the CBO doesn’t know about) to fix this, in the next 6 months?

  223. “Link or take it back.”
    Really? Is that an order?
    Where it is running into trouble is where the current legislature doesn’t continue to subsidize the insurance companies beyond what the original law specified. It is collapsing because, without the government subsidies eventually there will be no insurance company willing to insure everyone at the defined required levels.
    Yes, all we have to do is guarantee a profit for all the insurance companies and pay 100% of Medicaid adds for all the states forever and Obamacare would be fixed. Well, financially anyway.
    That would make it not the ACA, which didn’t anticipate either of those things. It ended the insurance company subsidies in 2015 and never adequately anticipated the cost of Medicaid expansion.
    Or perhaps the people who are telling you it isn’t are ignorant or lying to you. Because I intimately know how it has degraded over the last 3 years, cost of policies, size of deductibles and copays, number of options and all of that was before this Congress.

  224. “Link or take it back.”
    Really? Is that an order?
    Where it is running into trouble is where the current legislature doesn’t continue to subsidize the insurance companies beyond what the original law specified. It is collapsing because, without the government subsidies eventually there will be no insurance company willing to insure everyone at the defined required levels.
    Yes, all we have to do is guarantee a profit for all the insurance companies and pay 100% of Medicaid adds for all the states forever and Obamacare would be fixed. Well, financially anyway.
    That would make it not the ACA, which didn’t anticipate either of those things. It ended the insurance company subsidies in 2015 and never adequately anticipated the cost of Medicaid expansion.
    Or perhaps the people who are telling you it isn’t are ignorant or lying to you. Because I intimately know how it has degraded over the last 3 years, cost of policies, size of deductibles and copays, number of options and all of that was before this Congress.

  225. Just out of curiosity, do you have an estimate (and I realize it will be only an estimate) of what the change will be if the current law goes forward? Just so we can at least see what you think the proper comparison is.
    Thanks

  226. Just out of curiosity, do you have an estimate (and I realize it will be only an estimate) of what the change will be if the current law goes forward? Just so we can at least see what you think the proper comparison is.
    Thanks

  227. It’s going to be very difficult to reduce the cost of healthcare if nothing is done on the supply side.
    Healthcare is the most heavily regulated sector of the economy. Not just public regulators, but private regulators like the AMA and other professional organizations.
    Many medical procedures and treatments that are reserved to MDs could be done by nurse practitioners at a lower cost.
    Why must women see a doctor and pay for an office visit just to legally purchase birth control pills?
    State level Certificates of Need limit the availability of medical care and increase costs.
    I suspect that there are surgeries that are now so by the numbers that they could be done by surgical technicians without a medical degree.
    Each state having its own medical license requirements limits mobility and availability of practitioners.
    An inclusive list would be many times longer than this.

  228. It’s going to be very difficult to reduce the cost of healthcare if nothing is done on the supply side.
    Healthcare is the most heavily regulated sector of the economy. Not just public regulators, but private regulators like the AMA and other professional organizations.
    Many medical procedures and treatments that are reserved to MDs could be done by nurse practitioners at a lower cost.
    Why must women see a doctor and pay for an office visit just to legally purchase birth control pills?
    State level Certificates of Need limit the availability of medical care and increase costs.
    I suspect that there are surgeries that are now so by the numbers that they could be done by surgical technicians without a medical degree.
    Each state having its own medical license requirements limits mobility and availability of practitioners.
    An inclusive list would be many times longer than this.

  229. Marty, I re-read your earlier comments, and they are at least consistent with what you’re saying now. The only thing I don’t get is that we all know the CBO doesn’t have a crystal ball and has to make certain assumptions. The question isn’t whether or not they are assuming things will change with the ACA, but whether or not they are making comparable assumptions about the two laws in making projections.
    What makes you think the assumptions they are making about each law are somehow biased against what’s being proposed in the senate bill? What makes you think the senate bill will/would go exactly as they’re predicting while the ACA will/would go far worse than predicted?
    Why isn’t it just as likely that their projections about the senate bill’s implementation are overly rosy?

  230. Marty, I re-read your earlier comments, and they are at least consistent with what you’re saying now. The only thing I don’t get is that we all know the CBO doesn’t have a crystal ball and has to make certain assumptions. The question isn’t whether or not they are assuming things will change with the ACA, but whether or not they are making comparable assumptions about the two laws in making projections.
    What makes you think the assumptions they are making about each law are somehow biased against what’s being proposed in the senate bill? What makes you think the senate bill will/would go exactly as they’re predicting while the ACA will/would go far worse than predicted?
    Why isn’t it just as likely that their projections about the senate bill’s implementation are overly rosy?

  233. wj,
    I suspect that the numbers of uninsured would go up something less than the 15M projected for next year but probably all of that by 2026. This is based on the numbers of people that they say wont buy insurance because they cant afford to go to the doctor anyway, which is already happening, even in employer provided health insurance. In essence whatever part of that increase is due to choice it will happen anyway.
    That leaves between 6 and 7 million people not getting Medicaid. While, based on the 50% overages between 2014 estimates and 2016 actuals I am really not sure how much the Medicaid costs will accelerate, it is certainly well beyond a flat line and at some point “something will have to be done”. It is not an infinite resource.
    Not insuring this 6-7M is completely stupid of course, but it can be done more efficiently. I do think to solve the problem permanently we should push it back to the states, in block grants so eventually the leverage exists to make them cover everyone.

  234. wj,
    I suspect that the numbers of uninsured would go up something less than the 15M projected for next year but probably all of that by 2026. This is based on the numbers of people that they say wont buy insurance because they cant afford to go to the doctor anyway, which is already happening, even in employer provided health insurance. In essence whatever part of that increase is due to choice it will happen anyway.
    That leaves between 6 and 7 million people not getting Medicaid. While, based on the 50% overages between 2014 estimates and 2016 actuals I am really not sure how much the Medicaid costs will accelerate, it is certainly well beyond a flat line and at some point “something will have to be done”. It is not an infinite resource.
    Not insuring this 6-7M is completely stupid of course, but it can be done more efficiently. I do think to solve the problem permanently we should push it back to the states, in block grants so eventually the leverage exists to make them cover everyone.

  235. I appreciate Charles’ comment here because he is addressing *cost*.
    Most of the discussion on the topic of health care is around who gets stuck paying the bill. If it wasn’t so expensive in the first place, that would be less of a problem.
    Regardless of what the cost is, there will always be the issue of providing care for folks who just don’t have a lot of money.
    But the issues we are dealing with now extend well beyond that. Among other things, the rise in health care costs is one of the reasons real wages have been flat for so long.
    It’s starving other sectors of the economy.

  236. I appreciate Charles’ comment here because he is addressing *cost*.
    Most of the discussion on the topic of health care is around who gets stuck paying the bill. If it wasn’t so expensive in the first place, that would be less of a problem.
    Regardless of what the cost is, there will always be the issue of providing care for folks who just don’t have a lot of money.
    But the issues we are dealing with now extend well beyond that. Among other things, the rise in health care costs is one of the reasons real wages have been flat for so long.
    It’s starving other sectors of the economy.

  237. Charles at 2:37
    Yes to pretty much all of that. (Of course, parts of the economy which are regulated as health care, e.g. hair and beauty salons, are so only because it limits competition more effectively.)
    But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?

  238. Charles at 2:37
    Yes to pretty much all of that. (Of course, parts of the economy which are regulated as health care, e.g. hair and beauty salons, are so only because it limits competition more effectively.)
    But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?

  239. I am really not sure how much the Medicaid costs will accelerate, it is certainly well beyond a flat line and at some point “something will have to be done”.
    I agree with this. But, it’s not due to “Medicaid costs”, it’s due to costs, full stop.
    If Medicaid doesn’t pay, somebody else has to. Or, no-one pays, and care is not delivered. And that’s not free, either, because folks either go to the ER, or whatever they may have contributed to overall prosperity (in whatever form) is lost.
    It’s actually a kind of dead loss to all of us if thousands or millions of people die before their time, or live significantly limited lives due to preventable or treatable illness.
    To me, the Senate bill is basically the feds responding to “something has to be done” by saying “somebody else do it”. Which is, on its face, attractive to people who just hate the freaking federal government, but the states are kind of a crap shoot.
    You seem to believe that pushing it on to the states is going to inspire them to rise to the occasion and fill in the gaps. I suspect that belief is naive.

  240. I am really not sure how much the Medicaid costs will accelerate, it is certainly well beyond a flat line and at some point “something will have to be done”.
    I agree with this. But, it’s not due to “Medicaid costs”, it’s due to costs, full stop.
    If Medicaid doesn’t pay, somebody else has to. Or, no-one pays, and care is not delivered. And that’s not free, either, because folks either go to the ER, or whatever they may have contributed to overall prosperity (in whatever form) is lost.
    It’s actually a kind of dead loss to all of us if thousands or millions of people die before their time, or live significantly limited lives due to preventable or treatable illness.
    To me, the Senate bill is basically the feds responding to “something has to be done” by saying “somebody else do it”. Which is, on its face, attractive to people who just hate the freaking federal government, but the states are kind of a crap shoot.
    You seem to believe that pushing it on to the states is going to inspire them to rise to the occasion and fill in the gaps. I suspect that belief is naive.

  241. Where it is running into trouble is where the current legislature doesn’t continue to subsidize the insurance companies beyond what the original law specified. It is collapsing because, without the government subsidies eventually there will be no insurance company willing to insure everyone at the defined required levels.
    Correct me if I’m wrong here, but it appears you are claiming that we (the federal government?) are currently giving the insurance companies more that originally authorized by statute? Wouldn’t this be breaking the law? Tell me how this took place.

  242. Where it is running into trouble is where the current legislature doesn’t continue to subsidize the insurance companies beyond what the original law specified. It is collapsing because, without the government subsidies eventually there will be no insurance company willing to insure everyone at the defined required levels.
    Correct me if I’m wrong here, but it appears you are claiming that we (the federal government?) are currently giving the insurance companies more that originally authorized by statute? Wouldn’t this be breaking the law? Tell me how this took place.

  243. But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?
    I’m doing my part. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in probably 8 or 10 years.
    It’s all NP’s in my guy’s practice now.

  244. But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?
    I’m doing my part. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in probably 8 or 10 years.
    It’s all NP’s in my guy’s practice now.

  245. Why must women see a doctor and pay for an office visit just to legally purchase birth control pills?
    because BC is not risk-free.
    ex. my wife’s arm started swelling up and getting sore last year. allergy? bug bite? lymph node? it took all of her doctors a couple of weeks to figure out that it was a blood clot. luckily it was in her arm where it effects were visible (if hard to diagnose at first). if it had been internal, or larger, or in a different place… well. she’s off BC now. and some people should never start.

  246. Why must women see a doctor and pay for an office visit just to legally purchase birth control pills?
    because BC is not risk-free.
    ex. my wife’s arm started swelling up and getting sore last year. allergy? bug bite? lymph node? it took all of her doctors a couple of weeks to figure out that it was a blood clot. luckily it was in her arm where it effects were visible (if hard to diagnose at first). if it had been internal, or larger, or in a different place… well. she’s off BC now. and some people should never start.

  247. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in probably 8 or 10 years. It’s all NP’s in my guy’s practice now.
    ditto.
    it works. so i guess it’s OK. but people ask me who my doctor is and i say “Dr Torey. i don’t know if he’s still at the practice there or not. he was nice, but i don’t remember when i last saw him.”

  248. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in probably 8 or 10 years. It’s all NP’s in my guy’s practice now.
    ditto.
    it works. so i guess it’s OK. but people ask me who my doctor is and i say “Dr Torey. i don’t know if he’s still at the practice there or not. he was nice, but i don’t remember when i last saw him.”

  249. But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?
    There are some approaches that are evolving. Practitioners offering medical care in exchange for flat, monthly fees. Surgical clinics providing services for upfront cash payments.
    Here’s a whitepaper on medical reform. You may not agree with a lot of it.
    The American Health Care System: Principles for Successful Reform

  250. But do you see any realistic prospect for changing that in the foreseeable future?
    There are some approaches that are evolving. Practitioners offering medical care in exchange for flat, monthly fees. Surgical clinics providing services for upfront cash payments.
    Here’s a whitepaper on medical reform. You may not agree with a lot of it.
    The American Health Care System: Principles for Successful Reform

  251. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in awhile either. It’s nurse practitioners.
    I guess somehow the cost curve is getting bent but, help me out here, my copays, deductibles, and premiums continue to increase despite the cheaper labor attending to me.
    So I assume my primary care doctor is still raking it in, to the extent that Kaiser Permanente doctors can be said to rake, while others do the work.
    Why am I not seeing some discounts and rebates for cheaper service?
    Or does EVERYTHING have to be bullshit in America?

  252. I haven’t seen my primary care physician in awhile either. It’s nurse practitioners.
    I guess somehow the cost curve is getting bent but, help me out here, my copays, deductibles, and premiums continue to increase despite the cheaper labor attending to me.
    So I assume my primary care doctor is still raking it in, to the extent that Kaiser Permanente doctors can be said to rake, while others do the work.
    Why am I not seeing some discounts and rebates for cheaper service?
    Or does EVERYTHING have to be bullshit in America?

  255. Why am I not seeing some discounts and rebates for cheaper service?
    One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.

  256. Why am I not seeing some discounts and rebates for cheaper service?
    One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.

  259. “One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.”
    If anyone would know how to determine those costs and prices and bend the cost curve, it would be Kaiser Permanante.
    They’ve spent tens of millions of dollars studying processes and practices.
    If next time I go in and the $10.00 per hour receptionist tells me to look to the left and cough for the $30 copay, first, I’m going to demand some of the 200 percent markup back, and second, I’m going to set up a quickie-lube surgical center out of a van in their parking next to the taco truck.

  260. “One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.”
    If anyone would know how to determine those costs and prices and bend the cost curve, it would be Kaiser Permanante.
    They’ve spent tens of millions of dollars studying processes and practices.
    If next time I go in and the $10.00 per hour receptionist tells me to look to the left and cough for the $30 copay, first, I’m going to demand some of the 200 percent markup back, and second, I’m going to set up a quickie-lube surgical center out of a van in their parking next to the taco truck.

  263. Charles at 2:37
    Yes to pretty much all of that.
    Yes, sure. But Charles would go on to claim that is the fault of “the government” as if the government were some kind of sentient being and not a social institution that all too often reflects the desires of a bunch of powerful rent seeking constituencies.
    Dean Baker has done yeoman work on the many rent seeking restrictions on the supply of health care. These outcomes are due to political choices.
    Political choices can be revised.
    PS: I see mcconnell does not have the votes and pulled the plug today on holding a vote prior to the holiday.
    Hope remains.

  264. Charles at 2:37
    Yes to pretty much all of that.
    Yes, sure. But Charles would go on to claim that is the fault of “the government” as if the government were some kind of sentient being and not a social institution that all too often reflects the desires of a bunch of powerful rent seeking constituencies.
    Dean Baker has done yeoman work on the many rent seeking restrictions on the supply of health care. These outcomes are due to political choices.
    Political choices can be revised.
    PS: I see mcconnell does not have the votes and pulled the plug today on holding a vote prior to the holiday.
    Hope remains.

  265. “Hope remains.”
    No, it doesn’t. It will be easy peasy to make the bill more brutal and kill even more Americans, and thus pick up the required remaining votes from the hardliners like Ted Cruz, who, amazingly, remains free of bullet wounds.
    By the way, my apartment rent goes up year after year regardless of supply and demand and despite hundreds of new units going up in the immediate area.
    I’ve never met my landlord, but he or she has plenty of low paid practitioners on hand to collect.
    Like my invisible doctor, what exactly does my landlord do for his annual pay raises?
    I ought to get a free colonoscopy from my landlord as a perk.
    Especially since I’m already bending over.

  266. “Hope remains.”
    No, it doesn’t. It will be easy peasy to make the bill more brutal and kill even more Americans, and thus pick up the required remaining votes from the hardliners like Ted Cruz, who, amazingly, remains free of bullet wounds.
    By the way, my apartment rent goes up year after year regardless of supply and demand and despite hundreds of new units going up in the immediate area.
    I’ve never met my landlord, but he or she has plenty of low paid practitioners on hand to collect.
    Like my invisible doctor, what exactly does my landlord do for his annual pay raises?
    I ought to get a free colonoscopy from my landlord as a perk.
    Especially since I’m already bending over.

  267. One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.
    Maybe providers could offer their services on ebay, and just let folks bid at auction for their medical care.
    Can’t get much more market-price-setting than that.

  268. One reason may be that it’s difficult for anyone, including service providers, to know what the price for various services should be.
    Maybe providers could offer their services on ebay, and just let folks bid at auction for their medical care.
    Can’t get much more market-price-setting than that.

  269. “If Medicaid doesn’t pay, somebody else has to.”
    I don’t really disagree with this. However,
    right now no one has to do the work. The Governors don’t have to justify the cost to their constituents because it is buried in the manna from heaven.
    Republican or Democrat, they get to just be shocked, shocked I say, that anyone would think their constituents aren’t worth unlimited funding.
    At least in a block grant system there is some element of accountability for creating the best possible system at the state level. Right now it’s just that money tree my Dad told me didn’t exist.

  270. “If Medicaid doesn’t pay, somebody else has to.”
    I don’t really disagree with this. However,
    right now no one has to do the work. The Governors don’t have to justify the cost to their constituents because it is buried in the manna from heaven.
    Republican or Democrat, they get to just be shocked, shocked I say, that anyone would think their constituents aren’t worth unlimited funding.
    At least in a block grant system there is some element of accountability for creating the best possible system at the state level. Right now it’s just that money tree my Dad told me didn’t exist.

  273. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.

  274. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.

  275. But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.
    I have some friends from Bosnia (who are now American citizens). They have doctors here, but when they visit their family once a year, they see doctors there because the healthcare is excellent. I think your xenophobia is showing.
    The citizens of Bosnia who are our age went through a terrible war, so I’m sure it had an effect on their public health. But their doctors are excellent.

  276. But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.
    I have some friends from Bosnia (who are now American citizens). They have doctors here, but when they visit their family once a year, they see doctors there because the healthcare is excellent. I think your xenophobia is showing.
    The citizens of Bosnia who are our age went through a terrible war, so I’m sure it had an effect on their public health. But their doctors are excellent.

  277. It will be hilarious (no, actually tragic) when, in a few years, people from other countries will be comparing their excellent healthcare to our huge maternal mortality rate. Kind of like Texas now.
    Thanks to decent people like McKinney and you, lots of women die.

  278. It will be hilarious (no, actually tragic) when, in a few years, people from other countries will be comparing their excellent healthcare to our huge maternal mortality rate. Kind of like Texas now.
    Thanks to decent people like McKinney and you, lots of women die.

  279. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    health care is already rationed.
    ask your insurance company if they’ll pay for anything you want.

  280. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    health care is already rationed.
    ask your insurance company if they’ll pay for anything you want.

  281. “But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.”
    It’s one thing to step IN it.
    But try not to jump up and down in it.

  282. “But then we will be as good as all those other countries, we will have health care as good as Bosnia.”
    It’s one thing to step IN it.
    But try not to jump up and down in it.

  283. You were right on Bosnia. But not “all those other countries”. That’s OK, they have funny names.
    http://thepatientfactor.com/canadian-health-care-information/world-health-organizations-ranking-of-the-worlds-health-systems/
    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror
    sapient, the high maternal mortality rate in Texas, especially among black women, is a metric that is believed by republicans to prove that freedom reigns supreme.
    They see a corpse, especially a black or female one, and they believe things are going precisely as the founders and God intended.

  284. You were right on Bosnia. But not “all those other countries”. That’s OK, they have funny names.
    http://thepatientfactor.com/canadian-health-care-information/world-health-organizations-ranking-of-the-worlds-health-systems/
    http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror
    sapient, the high maternal mortality rate in Texas, especially among black women, is a metric that is believed by republicans to prove that freedom reigns supreme.
    They see a corpse, especially a black or female one, and they believe things are going precisely as the founders and God intended.

  287. I got no idea how good Bosnia healthcare is, I know a few people that live there, a good friend of the family goes back every other year to visit her family. It was a random European country that I was sure we would get compared to.
    I’m not sure what “you were right about (them)” means.

  288. I got no idea how good Bosnia healthcare is, I know a few people that live there, a good friend of the family goes back every other year to visit her family. It was a random European country that I was sure we would get compared to.
    I’m not sure what “you were right about (them)” means.

  289. “I got no idea how good Bosnia healthcare is, I know a few people that live there, a good friend of the family goes back every other year to visit her family. It was a random European country that I was sure we would get compared to.”
    Marty, if you are going to drink while blogging, give us a heads up so we can be on an even footing. 😉
    Though I’m in favor of some form of single payer, I’m increasingly skeptical that it could work in America, given the class of people we have to work with.
    Generally speaking, government-haters, tax-haters, hellbent on the ruination of a government because it might do something right, half-drowned in a bathtub, made to be incompetent to prove its incompetence.
    We couldn’t organize D-Day today either. Nor the moon landing.
    We are an incompetent bunch of self-righteous losers in dime store Davy Crockett hats, repeatedly grabbing our balls every few minutes to make sure we have balls.
    Ingrates.
    Shitheads who worship shitheaded real estate tycoons who stole everything they have and just hit the motherload.
    America is fucked up irrevocably without a radical game-ending makeover for the filth among us.

  290. “I got no idea how good Bosnia healthcare is, I know a few people that live there, a good friend of the family goes back every other year to visit her family. It was a random European country that I was sure we would get compared to.”
    Marty, if you are going to drink while blogging, give us a heads up so we can be on an even footing. 😉
    Though I’m in favor of some form of single payer, I’m increasingly skeptical that it could work in America, given the class of people we have to work with.
    Generally speaking, government-haters, tax-haters, hellbent on the ruination of a government because it might do something right, half-drowned in a bathtub, made to be incompetent to prove its incompetence.
    We couldn’t organize D-Day today either. Nor the moon landing.
    We are an incompetent bunch of self-righteous losers in dime store Davy Crockett hats, repeatedly grabbing our balls every few minutes to make sure we have balls.
    Ingrates.
    Shitheads who worship shitheaded real estate tycoons who stole everything they have and just hit the motherload.
    America is fucked up irrevocably without a radical game-ending makeover for the filth among us.

  291. Though I’m in favor of some form of single payer, I’m increasingly skeptical that it could work in America, given the class of people we have to work with.
    Generally speaking, government-haters, tax-haters, hellbent on the ruination of a government because it might do something right, half-drowned in a bathtub, made to be incompetent to prove its incompetence.
    We couldn’t organize D-Day today either. Nor the moon landing.
    I agree. The acknowledgment of that truth is causing me a whole lot of problems. But then, let’s just talk about me.

  292. Though I’m in favor of some form of single payer, I’m increasingly skeptical that it could work in America, given the class of people we have to work with.
    Generally speaking, government-haters, tax-haters, hellbent on the ruination of a government because it might do something right, half-drowned in a bathtub, made to be incompetent to prove its incompetence.
    We couldn’t organize D-Day today either. Nor the moon landing.
    I agree. The acknowledgment of that truth is causing me a whole lot of problems. But then, let’s just talk about me.

  293. Thanks to decent people like McKinney and you, lots of women die.
    So, they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    Based on death certificates, the task force also determined that cardiac events, drug overdoses and hypertensive disorders like pre-eclampsia (formerly called toxemia) were the leading reasons for the maternal deaths recorded, and that the majority of the deaths didn’t occur in the delivery room or shortly thereafter, but more than 42 days after delivery.
    Maternal Mortality in Texas: Unpacking the truth behind the state’s spike in pregnancy-related deaths

  294. Thanks to decent people like McKinney and you, lots of women die.
    So, they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    Based on death certificates, the task force also determined that cardiac events, drug overdoses and hypertensive disorders like pre-eclampsia (formerly called toxemia) were the leading reasons for the maternal deaths recorded, and that the majority of the deaths didn’t occur in the delivery room or shortly thereafter, but more than 42 days after delivery.
    Maternal Mortality in Texas: Unpacking the truth behind the state’s spike in pregnancy-related deaths

  295. So, they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    Hope you’re eating the right probiotics, CharlesWT, and doing exactly the right aerobics and lifting. Don’t forget perfect alcohol consumption, and stay away from Advil! And genetics. And such …

  296. So, they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    Hope you’re eating the right probiotics, CharlesWT, and doing exactly the right aerobics and lifting. Don’t forget perfect alcohol consumption, and stay away from Advil! And genetics. And such …

  297. Oh, and science discovers new things. So if you weren’t eating eggs, hope you’re eating them now! And fish twice a week? Or not?
    Many 90-year-olds have defied the odds. The stats for women’s health are pretty convincing. Pregnant women with prenatal care do well. Those without don’t. Check out the headstones.
    Or not.

  298. Oh, and science discovers new things. So if you weren’t eating eggs, hope you’re eating them now! And fish twice a week? Or not?
    Many 90-year-olds have defied the odds. The stats for women’s health are pretty convincing. Pregnant women with prenatal care do well. Those without don’t. Check out the headstones.
    Or not.

  299. From your link, charlesWT:
    “Sean Blackwell, M.D., explained that the primary issue isn’t that medical care in Texas hospitals is worsening or below par, but rather that too many women are not receiving care.”
    Hmmm.

  300. From your link, charlesWT:
    “Sean Blackwell, M.D., explained that the primary issue isn’t that medical care in Texas hospitals is worsening or below par, but rather that too many women are not receiving care.”
    Hmmm.

  301. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    I have employer-provided health insurance.
    I already know what rationed healthcare looks like
    I already know what high deductibles look like
    I already know what high co-pays look like
    maybe your OCare plan has you spoiled.
    as far as Bosnia, for most measures of basic public health go, our outcomes and general quality and availability of care are inferior to other OECD countries. and we pay more, by far. not a little more, a lot more.
    if what you really, really need is access to a piece of absolutely cutting edge, state of the art high tech gear, you may be at an advantage to be in the US system.
    otherwise, not.
    all of that is beyond well known, it’s a commonplace. it’s a given.
    any argument that proceeds from an assumption that having US health care turn into what any other OECD nation has is a step down is a losing argument.
    we’re just stupid. that is the problem.

  302. For 80% of Americans single payer will be a rude awakening to what rationed healthcare looks like.
    I have employer-provided health insurance.
    I already know what rationed healthcare looks like
    I already know what high deductibles look like
    I already know what high co-pays look like
    maybe your OCare plan has you spoiled.
    as far as Bosnia, for most measures of basic public health go, our outcomes and general quality and availability of care are inferior to other OECD countries. and we pay more, by far. not a little more, a lot more.
    if what you really, really need is access to a piece of absolutely cutting edge, state of the art high tech gear, you may be at an advantage to be in the US system.
    otherwise, not.
    all of that is beyond well known, it’s a commonplace. it’s a given.
    any argument that proceeds from an assumption that having US health care turn into what any other OECD nation has is a step down is a losing argument.
    we’re just stupid. that is the problem.

  303. CharlesWT, I want to ask you something: do you actually believe this stuff, or are you just playing about and rattling our cages for the fun of seeing where the conversation goes?

  304. CharlesWT, I want to ask you something: do you actually believe this stuff, or are you just playing about and rattling our cages for the fun of seeing where the conversation goes?

  315. So,they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    CharlesWT: to give just the latest example (and not arguing about Marty’s and McKinney’s personal responsibility, because as you know I prefer not to take part in this kind of personalisation) your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.

  316. So,they’re personally responsible for people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analyzed?
    CharlesWT: to give just the latest example (and not arguing about Marty’s and McKinney’s personal responsibility, because as you know I prefer not to take part in this kind of personalisation) your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.

  317. But GftNC, isn’t pregnancy a “lifestyle choice”? 😉
    Who knew.
    (But then, there seem to be those, although I don’t think Charles is among them, who think being raped counts as a “lifestyle choice.”)

  318. But GftNC, isn’t pregnancy a “lifestyle choice”? 😉
    Who knew.
    (But then, there seem to be those, although I don’t think Charles is among them, who think being raped counts as a “lifestyle choice.”)

  319. From the count’s link:

    If Congress were interested in fixing what’s wrong with it, they’d focus first on making all healthcare more affordable.

    Sounds good.

    The solution is a complicated one, involving gradual change that improves efficiency and transparency, slowly shifting more responsibility onto patients, so they make more cost-effective choices.

    This makes absolutely no sense to me.
    The market theory model of patients as consumers of some commodity called “health care” is not just nutty, it’s harmful.
    Market dynamics will find reasonable prices for things to the exact degree that the conditions for an efficient market exist.
    Virtually none of the conditions for an efficient market exist in the domain of health care. None.
    Markets are a great thing. Thinking that markets are the appropriate mechanism for resolving every issue in life is more than wrong-headed, it’s a kind of monomania.
    You wake up in the morning, have a pee, and see blood in your urine. Urinary tract infection? Kidney stone? Cancer? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    You find it increasingly difficult to swallow. GERD? Hypertrophy of the swallowing muscles? Incipient Parkinsons? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    Your kid spikes a fever of 104F. It’s 2 AM on Sunday morning. Take them to the ER? Give them a cool shower? Give them lots of fluids and an aspirin and see what happens? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    Everybody’s got a brain, I guess, but some folks seem determined not to use theirs.

  320. From the count’s link:

    If Congress were interested in fixing what’s wrong with it, they’d focus first on making all healthcare more affordable.

    Sounds good.

    The solution is a complicated one, involving gradual change that improves efficiency and transparency, slowly shifting more responsibility onto patients, so they make more cost-effective choices.

    This makes absolutely no sense to me.
    The market theory model of patients as consumers of some commodity called “health care” is not just nutty, it’s harmful.
    Market dynamics will find reasonable prices for things to the exact degree that the conditions for an efficient market exist.
    Virtually none of the conditions for an efficient market exist in the domain of health care. None.
    Markets are a great thing. Thinking that markets are the appropriate mechanism for resolving every issue in life is more than wrong-headed, it’s a kind of monomania.
    You wake up in the morning, have a pee, and see blood in your urine. Urinary tract infection? Kidney stone? Cancer? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    You find it increasingly difficult to swallow. GERD? Hypertrophy of the swallowing muscles? Incipient Parkinsons? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    Your kid spikes a fever of 104F. It’s 2 AM on Sunday morning. Take them to the ER? Give them a cool shower? Give them lots of fluids and an aspirin and see what happens? Make an informed and cost-effective choice.
    Everybody’s got a brain, I guess, but some folks seem determined not to use theirs.

  321. What’s the market-clearing price for angioplasty, I wonder? It would be nice if the number of patients and available doctors would be exactly equal.

  322. What’s the market-clearing price for angioplasty, I wonder? It would be nice if the number of patients and available doctors would be exactly equal.

  323. Market-based solutions all rely on “informed consumers/purchasers”. So if we are going to have market-based health care solutions, we need to create (because we definitely don’t have them now) informed consumers. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse. Possibly higher — not having that kind of education myself, I’m not sure exactly how much would be required.
    Getting that kind of detailed and wide-spread education funded would be a stretch. Not to mention the challenge of getting it by those who already oppose the very narrow and limited provision of sex education and information about contraception that the schools (mostly) provide. But it’s a prerequisite for a market-based health care solution.

  324. Market-based solutions all rely on “informed consumers/purchasers”. So if we are going to have market-based health care solutions, we need to create (because we definitely don’t have them now) informed consumers. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse. Possibly higher — not having that kind of education myself, I’m not sure exactly how much would be required.
    Getting that kind of detailed and wide-spread education funded would be a stretch. Not to mention the challenge of getting it by those who already oppose the very narrow and limited provision of sex education and information about contraception that the schools (mostly) provide. But it’s a prerequisite for a market-based health care solution.

  325. your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.
    For the sake of clarity, I should have said:
    your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as being a result of “lifestyle choices”.

  326. your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.
    For the sake of clarity, I should have said:
    your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as being a result of “lifestyle choices”.

  327. GftNC: … your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.

    Based on death certificates, the task force also determined that cardiac events, drug overdoses and hypertensive disorders like pre-eclampsia (formerly called toxemia) were the leading reasons for the maternal deaths recorded, and that the majority of the deaths didn’t occur in the delivery room or shortly thereafter, but more than 42 days after delivery.

    My link seems to indicate that most of the deaths are due to illnesses from lifestyle choices, genetic predispositions, and complications that even otherwise healthy women with good health care might encounter after a pregnancy. Probably a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided with adequate medical care.
    When a metric doubles in a single year, most of the change is likely due to a change in methodology rather than such a large change in what is being measured.

    For the Texas task force’s analysis, a pregnancy-associated death was defined as any woman who died within 365 days of birth or fetal death from any cause; the analysis examined all maternal deaths during the 2011-2012 time period, excluding motor accidents and non-pregnancy related cancers.
    By contrast, the national     Obstetrics & Gynecology report relied on death certificate questions related to pregnancy, which changed during the time period measured, 2000 to 2014. A so-called “pregnancy question” was added to the 2003 revision of the U.S. standard death certificate and included checkboxes for whether an individual was pregnant within the past year, pregnant at the time of death, not pregnant but pregnant within 42 days of death, not pregnant but pregnant 43 days to one year before death (considered later maternal death), or if she was unknown to be pregnant within the last year.

    When I encounter the term, Maternal Mortality, I, as I suspect a lot of people do, think of deaths occuring leading up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of childbirth. I don’t think of deaths for almost any reason for up to a year after childbirth. Do other countries use anything close to the above methodologies to count maternal deaths?

  328. GftNC: … your characterising of the increase in Texan maternal mortality largely, or even partly, as “lifestyle choices”.

    Based on death certificates, the task force also determined that cardiac events, drug overdoses and hypertensive disorders like pre-eclampsia (formerly called toxemia) were the leading reasons for the maternal deaths recorded, and that the majority of the deaths didn’t occur in the delivery room or shortly thereafter, but more than 42 days after delivery.

    My link seems to indicate that most of the deaths are due to illnesses from lifestyle choices, genetic predispositions, and complications that even otherwise healthy women with good health care might encounter after a pregnancy. Probably a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided with adequate medical care.
    When a metric doubles in a single year, most of the change is likely due to a change in methodology rather than such a large change in what is being measured.

    For the Texas task force’s analysis, a pregnancy-associated death was defined as any woman who died within 365 days of birth or fetal death from any cause; the analysis examined all maternal deaths during the 2011-2012 time period, excluding motor accidents and non-pregnancy related cancers.
    By contrast, the national     Obstetrics & Gynecology report relied on death certificate questions related to pregnancy, which changed during the time period measured, 2000 to 2014. A so-called “pregnancy question” was added to the 2003 revision of the U.S. standard death certificate and included checkboxes for whether an individual was pregnant within the past year, pregnant at the time of death, not pregnant but pregnant within 42 days of death, not pregnant but pregnant 43 days to one year before death (considered later maternal death), or if she was unknown to be pregnant within the last year.

    When I encounter the term, Maternal Mortality, I, as I suspect a lot of people do, think of deaths occuring leading up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of childbirth. I don’t think of deaths for almost any reason for up to a year after childbirth. Do other countries use anything close to the above methodologies to count maternal deaths?

  329. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse.
    To introduce another controversial point, not everyone has to conceal carry for conceal carry to have an impact. 🙂

  330. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse.
    To introduce another controversial point, not everyone has to conceal carry for conceal carry to have an impact. 🙂

  331. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse.
    what would likely happen in this case is that a new service industry would spring up: the medical financial analyst. instead of having to know medicine yourself, you would hire these people to analyze your diagnosis and treatment options vs. your bank account balance and how much credit you cost expect to get in the time allotted before treatment becomes moot. they would determine the best solution for you, for a small fee. rush orders would be available, for a larger fee.
    someone would eventually start calling them “death panels”.

  332. That means providing everybody with education in medicine at least equivalent to that of an EMT or nurse.
    what would likely happen in this case is that a new service industry would spring up: the medical financial analyst. instead of having to know medicine yourself, you would hire these people to analyze your diagnosis and treatment options vs. your bank account balance and how much credit you cost expect to get in the time allotted before treatment becomes moot. they would determine the best solution for you, for a small fee. rush orders would be available, for a larger fee.
    someone would eventually start calling them “death panels”.

  335. Probably a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided with adequate medical care.
    This seems to me the nub of it, and to the extent that medical care for poorer women has been compromised in Texas, it’s hard to see how this is not a major cause.
    I have never heard of pre-eclampsia being described as anything other than a complication of pregnancy, and therefore any death where it is indicated as a cause as being a case of maternal mortality. It so happens that 2 of my (white, healthy, non-obese) friends suffered from pre-eclampsia, and both were immediately hospitalised until the birth, which in one case was brought forward somewhat.
    I cannot answer your question about the methodologies used in other countries’ compiling of maternal mortality statistics, but I thank you for your answer to me. Your statement with which I head this reply at least convinces me that you are not a raving lunatic, or someone just messing with us for the hell of it.

  336. Probably a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided with adequate medical care.
    This seems to me the nub of it, and to the extent that medical care for poorer women has been compromised in Texas, it’s hard to see how this is not a major cause.
    I have never heard of pre-eclampsia being described as anything other than a complication of pregnancy, and therefore any death where it is indicated as a cause as being a case of maternal mortality. It so happens that 2 of my (white, healthy, non-obese) friends suffered from pre-eclampsia, and both were immediately hospitalised until the birth, which in one case was brought forward somewhat.
    I cannot answer your question about the methodologies used in other countries’ compiling of maternal mortality statistics, but I thank you for your answer to me. Your statement with which I head this reply at least convinces me that you are not a raving lunatic, or someone just messing with us for the hell of it.

  337. Market-based solutions all rely on “informed consumers/purchasers”
    That’s only one of the requirements for an efficient market.
    Low barrier to entry, fungibility of the goods or services, no single provider dominates the market.
    It’s not a domain that affords efficient market dynamics.
    If you’re talking about band-aids, or OTC cold remedies, Ace bandages, yes.
    Almost anything else, no.

  338. Market-based solutions all rely on “informed consumers/purchasers”
    That’s only one of the requirements for an efficient market.
    Low barrier to entry, fungibility of the goods or services, no single provider dominates the market.
    It’s not a domain that affords efficient market dynamics.
    If you’re talking about band-aids, or OTC cold remedies, Ace bandages, yes.
    Almost anything else, no.

  339. “This makes absolutely no sense to me.”
    Me neither.
    Kidney stone got you doubled over in pain and near passing out?
    Put it out for bids. Take a few days to haggle.
    When you find your practitioner, do what market-based shoppers do in third-world open-air markets over pig’s feet: Get the price down until the seller says that’s his or her final offer, and then turn on your heel and walk (in this case, hobble, trying not to give away the extent of the pain because at that point the cost curve is going to bend the wrong way again) away. Invariably, the seller will stop you just as you seem unlikely to return and take another few centavos off the price.
    Be sure to ask “What’s with the $12 dollar tab of aspirin?” ahead of time.
    If you don’t like the price, go without. Go shoe shopping to pass the time since that’s exactly like shopping for kidney stone removal.
    If kidney stone removal is precisely like selling shoes, how come if I go shoe shopping while writhing and screaming in pain, the shoe seller doesn’t (1) jack the price of shoes up because obviously this person really needs some shoes, or 2) hand you the shoes for free, go ahead, get outta here, out of sheer empathy.
    So, if I’m shopping for shoes, why can’t I buy just one shoe without paying for two. Maybe I’m a hopper. Maybe I’ll hop back next week to purchase the other shoe? I don’t know. Why the iron rule?
    You say, well, to whom am I going sell the left-over shoe? To which I ask, am I wearing a sign as a consumer of your goods that says “Hi! I’m here to solve your problems.”
    I want, I want.
    Imelda Marcos wanted. Did a single shoe seller on the face of the Earth say “Sorry, you bought 40 pair yesterday, you don’t need any more shoes because we’re trying to bend the cost curve over here.”
    No. You know why? Neither do I!
    Or, how about this? Why can’t I buy one style of shoe, that is, just one shoe, for one foot and a completely different style of shoe, again, one shoe, for the other .. without paying for four shoes? Hanh?
    Why can’t I get two colonoscopies for the price of one? Say, on Thursdays. Say, I have a friend who needs one, so I share the coupon with him?
    Why, I ask you, can’t the hospitals do what the bar down the street does. They have six bottles of various spirits, each with the label covered up and for a dollar off you get to choose your poison. They don’t say about three of them, that you don’t need that even though you are willing to pay.
    It could be fun. The hospitals each day could advertise six mystery procedures and you go in and guess which one you want on that day. it could be six different ones each day or week.
    Do some merchandising here.
    Why don’t hospitals and doctors have “used MRI machine lots” in the same vein that automobile sellers have used car lots. They work, why can’t we use them for less price.
    See, by market forces, what Americans mean is that we’ll explain to you how it works in a perfectly reasonable “it’s very simple” Milton Friedman PBS tone of voice, kindofa down in the throat serious business voice, but what we really mean is how the fuck should I know how this works, I’m just doing what everyone else does, living off the vig and if you don’t like it, go fuck yourself.

  340. “This makes absolutely no sense to me.”
    Me neither.
    Kidney stone got you doubled over in pain and near passing out?
    Put it out for bids. Take a few days to haggle.
    When you find your practitioner, do what market-based shoppers do in third-world open-air markets over pig’s feet: Get the price down until the seller says that’s his or her final offer, and then turn on your heel and walk (in this case, hobble, trying not to give away the extent of the pain because at that point the cost curve is going to bend the wrong way again) away. Invariably, the seller will stop you just as you seem unlikely to return and take another few centavos off the price.
    Be sure to ask “What’s with the $12 dollar tab of aspirin?” ahead of time.
    If you don’t like the price, go without. Go shoe shopping to pass the time since that’s exactly like shopping for kidney stone removal.
    If kidney stone removal is precisely like selling shoes, how come if I go shoe shopping while writhing and screaming in pain, the shoe seller doesn’t (1) jack the price of shoes up because obviously this person really needs some shoes, or 2) hand you the shoes for free, go ahead, get outta here, out of sheer empathy.
    So, if I’m shopping for shoes, why can’t I buy just one shoe without paying for two. Maybe I’m a hopper. Maybe I’ll hop back next week to purchase the other shoe? I don’t know. Why the iron rule?
    You say, well, to whom am I going sell the left-over shoe? To which I ask, am I wearing a sign as a consumer of your goods that says “Hi! I’m here to solve your problems.”
    I want, I want.
    Imelda Marcos wanted. Did a single shoe seller on the face of the Earth say “Sorry, you bought 40 pair yesterday, you don’t need any more shoes because we’re trying to bend the cost curve over here.”
    No. You know why? Neither do I!
    Or, how about this? Why can’t I buy one style of shoe, that is, just one shoe, for one foot and a completely different style of shoe, again, one shoe, for the other .. without paying for four shoes? Hanh?
    Why can’t I get two colonoscopies for the price of one? Say, on Thursdays. Say, I have a friend who needs one, so I share the coupon with him?
    Why, I ask you, can’t the hospitals do what the bar down the street does. They have six bottles of various spirits, each with the label covered up and for a dollar off you get to choose your poison. They don’t say about three of them, that you don’t need that even though you are willing to pay.
    It could be fun. The hospitals each day could advertise six mystery procedures and you go in and guess which one you want on that day. it could be six different ones each day or week.
    Do some merchandising here.
    Why don’t hospitals and doctors have “used MRI machine lots” in the same vein that automobile sellers have used car lots. They work, why can’t we use them for less price.
    See, by market forces, what Americans mean is that we’ll explain to you how it works in a perfectly reasonable “it’s very simple” Milton Friedman PBS tone of voice, kindofa down in the throat serious business voice, but what we really mean is how the fuck should I know how this works, I’m just doing what everyone else does, living off the vig and if you don’t like it, go fuck yourself.

  341. Has it ever occurred to anyone that hospitals are the only buildings that contain both gift shops and morgues on the premises?

  342. Has it ever occurred to anyone that hospitals are the only buildings that contain both gift shops and morgues on the premises?

  343. I just want to know how “making more cost-effective choices” differs in practical terms from that boogeyman “rationing.” Are you supposed to feel better about going without because you decided on your own to forego (probably ignorantly and unwisely) this or that medical procedure or service?

  344. I just want to know how “making more cost-effective choices” differs in practical terms from that boogeyman “rationing.” Are you supposed to feel better about going without because you decided on your own to forego (probably ignorantly and unwisely) this or that medical procedure or service?

  347. “making more cost-effective choices” is lunacy.
    our health care system is based on a small number of huge and powerful companies whose entire business model is based on taking people’s money and then paying health care providers as little of that money as they can. they aren’t in the business of overpaying. if there were a lot of low-hanging “cost-effective choices” out there, insurance companies would be all over that shit.
    how are unorganized individuals supposed to work the system better than monster like BCBSs and UHC ?

  348. “making more cost-effective choices” is lunacy.
    our health care system is based on a small number of huge and powerful companies whose entire business model is based on taking people’s money and then paying health care providers as little of that money as they can. they aren’t in the business of overpaying. if there were a lot of low-hanging “cost-effective choices” out there, insurance companies would be all over that shit.
    how are unorganized individuals supposed to work the system better than monster like BCBSs and UHC ?

  349. As mentioned over and over here and elsewhere, the concept of a “market” for “healthcare” has severe theoretical problems. Conservatives never acknowledge this essential fact, and plow right on with specious “skin in the game” proposals that actually reduce the number of folks with coverage (aka, “taking skin out of the game”).
    In addition….
    rates are (to a large degree) set by doctors.
    the supply of doctors is artificially constrained.
    We give out patents for drugs and medical devices like free candy at the 4th of July parade.
    There are practically millions of prices out there with wild variances that have no earthly connection to “actual cost”, and there is no effective way for a consumer to make an “informed judgement”.
    I’d like to see Charles describe the typical healthcare v. no healthcare indifference curve.
    I’d wager it has a rather unusual shape.
    We have a system totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages them.
    But when common sense solutions are put forth, all we get is spittle flecked screaming about “the market” because as you know, the market is God.

  350. As mentioned over and over here and elsewhere, the concept of a “market” for “healthcare” has severe theoretical problems. Conservatives never acknowledge this essential fact, and plow right on with specious “skin in the game” proposals that actually reduce the number of folks with coverage (aka, “taking skin out of the game”).
    In addition….
    rates are (to a large degree) set by doctors.
    the supply of doctors is artificially constrained.
    We give out patents for drugs and medical devices like free candy at the 4th of July parade.
    There are practically millions of prices out there with wild variances that have no earthly connection to “actual cost”, and there is no effective way for a consumer to make an “informed judgement”.
    I’d like to see Charles describe the typical healthcare v. no healthcare indifference curve.
    I’d wager it has a rather unusual shape.
    We have a system totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages them.
    But when common sense solutions are put forth, all we get is spittle flecked screaming about “the market” because as you know, the market is God.

  351. When I encounter the term, Maternal Mortality, I, as I suspect a lot of people do, think of deaths occuring leading up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of childbirth.
    Similarly, when we see data regarding death from alcoholism, we should only count those who drop dead in the taverns and cocktail lounges, and being in the restroom at the time doesn’t count.
    GFNC…that study had some high powered critics. If you get a moment, you should research further.
    Thanks.

  352. When I encounter the term, Maternal Mortality, I, as I suspect a lot of people do, think of deaths occuring leading up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of childbirth.
    Similarly, when we see data regarding death from alcoholism, we should only count those who drop dead in the taverns and cocktail lounges, and being in the restroom at the time doesn’t count.
    GFNC…that study had some high powered critics. If you get a moment, you should research further.
    Thanks.

  355. bobbyp, if I gave the impression I was convinced by Charles’s linked study, that was a wrong impression. What I was glad to see was a further gloss on his original, ridiculous remark that the increase in maternal deaths was down to “people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analysed”. At least he agreed that “with adequate medical care a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided”. But FYI, I agree completely with your first paragraph above.

  356. bobbyp, if I gave the impression I was convinced by Charles’s linked study, that was a wrong impression. What I was glad to see was a further gloss on his original, ridiculous remark that the increase in maternal deaths was down to “people’s lifestyle choices and the variations in how the data on maternal mortality is collected and analysed”. At least he agreed that “with adequate medical care a good percentage of the deaths could have been avoided”. But FYI, I agree completely with your first paragraph above.

  357. i’d like to know if the data for other countries counts deaths up to a year after childbirth, too. not that there can’t be childbirth-related deaths a year after the event, but just to know if we’re comparing apples to apples.
    unless there’s an international standard for this (ISO 12936?), i suspect different studies will have a different cut-off.

  358. i’d like to know if the data for other countries counts deaths up to a year after childbirth, too. not that there can’t be childbirth-related deaths a year after the event, but just to know if we’re comparing apples to apples.
    unless there’s an international standard for this (ISO 12936?), i suspect different studies will have a different cut-off.

  359. Want something long to read on health care? Of course you do.
    So check out this report from the folks that the Economist’s Intelligence Unit. Among the findings:

    • Political will and a social compact are prerequisites for both access and sustainable health systems.
    • Good primary care is a vital building block for good access.

    And finally this:

    “Universal coverage does not mean universal access, but extending universal health coverage (UHC) can be a crucial part of improving access. There is an important distinction to be made between the ability to access healthcare services and its successful delivery to a wide population. A right to healthcare may be guaranteed in law but not actually available in reality, especially in remote or underdeveloped regions. It may be accessible but not affordable.”

    That last is something that has (deliberately?) contributed to a lot of confusion in American discussions of the latest proposals on the subject.

  360. Want something long to read on health care? Of course you do.
    So check out this report from the folks that the Economist’s Intelligence Unit. Among the findings:

    • Political will and a social compact are prerequisites for both access and sustainable health systems.
    • Good primary care is a vital building block for good access.

    And finally this:

    “Universal coverage does not mean universal access, but extending universal health coverage (UHC) can be a crucial part of improving access. There is an important distinction to be made between the ability to access healthcare services and its successful delivery to a wide population. A right to healthcare may be guaranteed in law but not actually available in reality, especially in remote or underdeveloped regions. It may be accessible but not affordable.”

    That last is something that has (deliberately?) contributed to a lot of confusion in American discussions of the latest proposals on the subject.

  361. our health care system is based on a small number of huge and powerful companies whose entire business model is based on taking people’s money and then paying health care providers as little of that money as they can. they aren’t in the business of overpaying. if there were a lot of low-hanging “cost-effective choices” out there, insurance companies would be all over that shit. (cleek)
    and
    We have a system totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages them. (bobbyp)
    That’s it in a nutshell.

  362. our health care system is based on a small number of huge and powerful companies whose entire business model is based on taking people’s money and then paying health care providers as little of that money as they can. they aren’t in the business of overpaying. if there were a lot of low-hanging “cost-effective choices” out there, insurance companies would be all over that shit. (cleek)
    and
    We have a system totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages them. (bobbyp)
    That’s it in a nutshell.

  365. bobbyp, if I gave the impression I was convinced by Charles’s linked study, that was a wrong impression.
    That thought never crossed my mind.
    Regards,

  366. bobbyp, if I gave the impression I was convinced by Charles’s linked study, that was a wrong impression.
    That thought never crossed my mind.
    Regards,

  369. We have a system national culture totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages abets coddles protects enables idolizes and kowtows to them. — bobbyp quoted by hsh, enhanced by me

  370. We have a system national culture totally infested with rent seekers, and a set of public policies that encourages abets coddles protects enables idolizes and kowtows to them. — bobbyp quoted by hsh, enhanced by me

  377. i’m pretty sure that violent rhetoric from armed extremists is only cause for concern if they aren’t white. otherwise, it’s fine.

  378. i’m pretty sure that violent rhetoric from armed extremists is only cause for concern if they aren’t white. otherwise, it’s fine.

  379. The first thing that popped into my mind (you’ll never guess) was Catholic radio, which I sometimes happen upon while channel surfing in the car on the drive between home and Portland. (This is a bit of a different beast from the more generic “Christian” radio that I hear on my trips to Ohio.)
    The commonality is an extremely targeted emotional loading of the message. As with advertising, I am flummoxed that anyone can take this seriously instead of as an attempt to play them.
    Sad to say, I’m flummoxed a lot. But as to this specific instance, since I don’t follow the NRA I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.

  380. The first thing that popped into my mind (you’ll never guess) was Catholic radio, which I sometimes happen upon while channel surfing in the car on the drive between home and Portland. (This is a bit of a different beast from the more generic “Christian” radio that I hear on my trips to Ohio.)
    The commonality is an extremely targeted emotional loading of the message. As with advertising, I am flummoxed that anyone can take this seriously instead of as an attempt to play them.
    Sad to say, I’m flummoxed a lot. But as to this specific instance, since I don’t follow the NRA I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.

  381. Meanwhile, today I learned that one of my co-workers was leaving the company. He’s Armenian, his wife’s visa is expiring, and they are unable to get a renewal.
    Things were proceeding nicely, it seems, until Trump took office.
    Great guy, great work ethic, accomplished entrepreneur, doing a great job transforming the culture of my workplace to a more functional and effective style. Amazingly savvy for a guy his age, he’s probably about 30.
    Nice knowing ya!
    But now I must break away, because I have to arrange primary care referrals for two procedures I have coming up in the next month. I called my primary’s office this AM to get that done, they told me I first had to call back the specialist’s offices to get some magic ID number, then call them again with that number to get the referral.
    My primary is the guy who sent me to the specialist, and provided me with their contact information. They all participate in the same network of practices. I’m pretty sure they have whatever ID number they need on file.
    But, as the patient, it’s my job to track all of this bullshit down so that they can provide a referral for services that they recommended for me, otherwise I will have to pay for them myself.
    Too much bullshit for one day.
    Home-made strawberry jam on my PBJ though, so it ain’t all bad.

  382. Meanwhile, today I learned that one of my co-workers was leaving the company. He’s Armenian, his wife’s visa is expiring, and they are unable to get a renewal.
    Things were proceeding nicely, it seems, until Trump took office.
    Great guy, great work ethic, accomplished entrepreneur, doing a great job transforming the culture of my workplace to a more functional and effective style. Amazingly savvy for a guy his age, he’s probably about 30.
    Nice knowing ya!
    But now I must break away, because I have to arrange primary care referrals for two procedures I have coming up in the next month. I called my primary’s office this AM to get that done, they told me I first had to call back the specialist’s offices to get some magic ID number, then call them again with that number to get the referral.
    My primary is the guy who sent me to the specialist, and provided me with their contact information. They all participate in the same network of practices. I’m pretty sure they have whatever ID number they need on file.
    But, as the patient, it’s my job to track all of this bullshit down so that they can provide a referral for services that they recommended for me, otherwise I will have to pay for them myself.
    Too much bullshit for one day.
    Home-made strawberry jam on my PBJ though, so it ain’t all bad.

  395. I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.
    I see it as the further spreading of a dangerous stain into the commonly accepted level of discourse inhabiting the public sphere. It typifies a level of right wing extreme rhetoric not seen since the KKK’s heyday in the 1920’s if you ask me.

  396. I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.
    I see it as the further spreading of a dangerous stain into the commonly accepted level of discourse inhabiting the public sphere. It typifies a level of right wing extreme rhetoric not seen since the KKK’s heyday in the 1920’s if you ask me.

  401. I see it as the further spreading of a dangerous stain into the commonly accepted level of discourse inhabiting the public sphere. It typifies a level of right wing extreme rhetoric not seen since the KKK’s heyday in the 1920’s if you ask me.
    Adam Silverman at Balloon-Juice has been doing occasional posts about this, framing it as the attempts of various groups around the world to destroy what he calls “the gray zone” — the public sphere where we all co-exist relatively peacefully.
    In fact, he has a post up at this very moment about this NRA ad. (I haven’t read it yet but Adam is always good.)

  402. I see it as the further spreading of a dangerous stain into the commonly accepted level of discourse inhabiting the public sphere. It typifies a level of right wing extreme rhetoric not seen since the KKK’s heyday in the 1920’s if you ask me.
    Adam Silverman at Balloon-Juice has been doing occasional posts about this, framing it as the attempts of various groups around the world to destroy what he calls “the gray zone” — the public sphere where we all co-exist relatively peacefully.
    In fact, he has a post up at this very moment about this NRA ad. (I haven’t read it yet but Adam is always good.)

  403. I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.
    This also occurred to me after I posted, but all in all, what bobbyp says sounds about right.

  404. I don’t know whether this is an escalation of the level of incitement or business as usual.
    This also occurred to me after I posted, but all in all, what bobbyp says sounds about right.

  407. we can thank the internet for giving us the ability to instantaneously amplify all the abhorrent things that previously would have never made it to the general public.
    i’m sure wingnuts were saying the same things in 1995, but their message couldn’t spread very far and the public mostly never heard about it.
    now, every time some asshat says something outrageous, everybody knows about it – detractors and sympathizers.

  408. we can thank the internet for giving us the ability to instantaneously amplify all the abhorrent things that previously would have never made it to the general public.
    i’m sure wingnuts were saying the same things in 1995, but their message couldn’t spread very far and the public mostly never heard about it.
    now, every time some asshat says something outrageous, everybody knows about it – detractors and sympathizers.

  413. Murdochs found to be “fit and proper” in the enquiry into their Sky bid, although the bid has now been referred to the Monopolies Commission. This is not good, it’s a serious hurdle overcome by them. Meanwhile, as far as I know, Tom Watson (Labour MP) still awaits an answer to his question to Teresa May about whether May received any input from Murdoch when she re-appointed Michael Gove (someone she is said to detest, and who she fired the minute she became PM, but who works for Murdoch) to her cabinet after the recent election.

  414. Murdochs found to be “fit and proper” in the enquiry into their Sky bid, although the bid has now been referred to the Monopolies Commission. This is not good, it’s a serious hurdle overcome by them. Meanwhile, as far as I know, Tom Watson (Labour MP) still awaits an answer to his question to Teresa May about whether May received any input from Murdoch when she re-appointed Michael Gove (someone she is said to detest, and who she fired the minute she became PM, but who works for Murdoch) to her cabinet after the recent election.

  415. i’m sure wingnuts were saying the same things in 1995
    I can say from experience that folks have been saying exactly the same stuff for the last 15 years.
    Longer than that if you want to include the hippie punching BS from the 60’s and 70’s.
    Americans are violent. The NRA has just figured out how to make a brand out of it.

  416. i’m sure wingnuts were saying the same things in 1995
    I can say from experience that folks have been saying exactly the same stuff for the last 15 years.
    Longer than that if you want to include the hippie punching BS from the 60’s and 70’s.
    Americans are violent. The NRA has just figured out how to make a brand out of it.

  419. I caught the NRA fisting ad, and if Loesch, that cuck c*nt, wants to engage in fisting, I suggest she enter a trump beauty queen contest and await her turn.
    She and her fellow conservative murderous infestations are not of the same species as we are:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0VW6sg50Pk
    She’s the one with the tail and the triple extending jaws.
    How many sequels featuring the murderous evolving republican party do we need to witness before we nuke from space to prevent them from killing all of us?

  420. I caught the NRA fisting ad, and if Loesch, that cuck c*nt, wants to engage in fisting, I suggest she enter a trump beauty queen contest and await her turn.
    She and her fellow conservative murderous infestations are not of the same species as we are:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0VW6sg50Pk
    She’s the one with the tail and the triple extending jaws.
    How many sequels featuring the murderous evolving republican party do we need to witness before we nuke from space to prevent them from killing all of us?

  421. Apparently, he’s going to go farther:
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sarah-sanders-trump-attack-morning-joe
    Tell me one other venue in violent America where trash talk like trump’s does not result in the trash talker being taken down physically and savagely?
    To paraphrase conservative republican filth, among them Laura Ingraham, is Scarborough not a man?
    C’mon Joe, be a tough talking piece of conservative shit like you were in Congress and have trump on the show and beat the shit out of him with your fists.
    Do something for American for a change, tough guy.

  422. Apparently, he’s going to go farther:
    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sarah-sanders-trump-attack-morning-joe
    Tell me one other venue in violent America where trash talk like trump’s does not result in the trash talker being taken down physically and savagely?
    To paraphrase conservative republican filth, among them Laura Ingraham, is Scarborough not a man?
    C’mon Joe, be a tough talking piece of conservative shit like you were in Congress and have trump on the show and beat the shit out of him with your fists.
    Do something for American for a change, tough guy.

  433. trump is them and they are trump.
    They have been yahoos ever since they imbibed deeply from the well of Social Darwinism back in the late 19th century. To paraphrase one wag, they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing. They have gotten worse over time….Taft Jr., Nixon, Reagan, Bushie boy, now this loon.

  434. trump is them and they are trump.
    They have been yahoos ever since they imbibed deeply from the well of Social Darwinism back in the late 19th century. To paraphrase one wag, they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing. They have gotten worse over time….Taft Jr., Nixon, Reagan, Bushie boy, now this loon.

  439. There are two different things going on here. One is that Trump is a criminal boorish buffoon. The other is that Republicans in the legislature are amoral at best.
    It’s only the boorishness which distinguishes Trump from George W Bush – someone who, unlike Trump, I’d enjoy having a drink with before he went to jail.
    The legislature Republicans are worse than they were, but not by very much – it’s just not possible to go far downhill from Newt Gingrich.

  440. There are two different things going on here. One is that Trump is a criminal boorish buffoon. The other is that Republicans in the legislature are amoral at best.
    It’s only the boorishness which distinguishes Trump from George W Bush – someone who, unlike Trump, I’d enjoy having a drink with before he went to jail.
    The legislature Republicans are worse than they were, but not by very much – it’s just not possible to go far downhill from Newt Gingrich.

  441. it’s just not possible to go far downhill from Newt Gingrich.
    It’s just that all of them are Newt now.

  442. it’s just not possible to go far downhill from Newt Gingrich.
    It’s just that all of them are Newt now.

  443. Count, it’s not my post but I’d really appreciate it if you’d pull back on calling people you hate “not human”, “vermin”, “not our species”, etc. As a Jew, I find this kind of dehumanizing language WAY too historically familiar.

  444. Count, it’s not my post but I’d really appreciate it if you’d pull back on calling people you hate “not human”, “vermin”, “not our species”, etc. As a Jew, I find this kind of dehumanizing language WAY too historically familiar.

  445. bobbyp,
    Why does the GOP want to kill people by cutting back the availability of Medicaid?
    I think it’s because they are pro-life. That makes sense, doesn’t it?

  446. bobbyp,
    Why does the GOP want to kill people by cutting back the availability of Medicaid?
    I think it’s because they are pro-life. That makes sense, doesn’t it?

  447. That makes sense, doesn’t it?
    Well, perhaps. What makes more sense to me is they are pro plutocrat, and have been since McKinley.

  448. That makes sense, doesn’t it?
    Well, perhaps. What makes more sense to me is they are pro plutocrat, and have been since McKinley.

  455. One thing about Mr Trump’s tweets: they remove a lot of the obfuscation around what he thinks the Republicans in Congress are supposed to be / intending to be doing. For those who were somehow having trouble seeing the priorities for the smoke and haze.

  456. One thing about Mr Trump’s tweets: they remove a lot of the obfuscation around what he thinks the Republicans in Congress are supposed to be / intending to be doing. For those who were somehow having trouble seeing the priorities for the smoke and haze.

  457. We have seen here, and not just in this thread, a number of rants (I don’t know what else to call them) concerning Republicans — all Republicans. This may give a somewhat different perspective. Money quote:

    On one side stand the ossified conservatives, who espouse an anti-government animus that has little resonance with an electorate demanding more, not less, from government. They embrace the know-nothingism of populism but plant their flag on the far-right wing of the party on everything from discrimination against gays to climate-change denial to anti-immigrant hysteria. On the other side stand, in both the House and Senate (and importantly, the governorships), the so-called moderates, some of whom are actually quite conservative but nevertheless reject both Trump and the zombie conservatism from the 1980s. As we’ve discussed, these are not split-the-difference compromisers. They have strong views on immigration (pro), the safety net (they want one), climate change (they believe in it), globalization (it’s here to stay) and Russia (against).

    That second quote feels a lot more like my personal views than either the first group description or the caricatures that adorn this thread. Just sayin’, there is rather more diversity(!) in my party that we sometimes see in the Congress.

  458. We have seen here, and not just in this thread, a number of rants (I don’t know what else to call them) concerning Republicans — all Republicans. This may give a somewhat different perspective. Money quote:

    On one side stand the ossified conservatives, who espouse an anti-government animus that has little resonance with an electorate demanding more, not less, from government. They embrace the know-nothingism of populism but plant their flag on the far-right wing of the party on everything from discrimination against gays to climate-change denial to anti-immigrant hysteria. On the other side stand, in both the House and Senate (and importantly, the governorships), the so-called moderates, some of whom are actually quite conservative but nevertheless reject both Trump and the zombie conservatism from the 1980s. As we’ve discussed, these are not split-the-difference compromisers. They have strong views on immigration (pro), the safety net (they want one), climate change (they believe in it), globalization (it’s here to stay) and Russia (against).

    That second quote feels a lot more like my personal views than either the first group description or the caricatures that adorn this thread. Just sayin’, there is rather more diversity(!) in my party that we sometimes see in the Congress.

  459. Those making over $200,000 are already deliberately increasing the federal deficit so that the United States of America will be forced to default on its debt payments on October 1, 2017.
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/06/donald-trump-has-finally-done-something-hes-increased-the-deficit-by-a-trillion-dollars/
    “They have strong views on immigration (pro), the safety net (they want one), climate change (they believe in it), globalization (it’s here to stay) and Russia (against).”
    Then they will be replaced during the next election cycle by the right-wing base and its right wing money who believe none of those items, just as they have been purged across the country repeatedly over the past 30 years.
    wj, you are a decent conservative on a life raft in heavy, blood red seas with sharks circling. But you keep mistaking the sharks for porpoises come to play.

  460. Those making over $200,000 are already deliberately increasing the federal deficit so that the United States of America will be forced to default on its debt payments on October 1, 2017.
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/06/donald-trump-has-finally-done-something-hes-increased-the-deficit-by-a-trillion-dollars/
    “They have strong views on immigration (pro), the safety net (they want one), climate change (they believe in it), globalization (it’s here to stay) and Russia (against).”
    Then they will be replaced during the next election cycle by the right-wing base and its right wing money who believe none of those items, just as they have been purged across the country repeatedly over the past 30 years.
    wj, you are a decent conservative on a life raft in heavy, blood red seas with sharks circling. But you keep mistaking the sharks for porpoises come to play.

  463. Nigel: This is an interesting story, perhaps a parable…
    I read the article. The best I can tell, “libertarian” was inserted in the headline as click bait.

  464. Nigel: This is an interesting story, perhaps a parable…
    I read the article. The best I can tell, “libertarian” was inserted in the headline as click bait.

  465. There has been an effort to turn NH into a libertarian state for a while now. They’ve made some progress. NH is a place that is quite congenial for libertarians.
    As a movement, they’re most visible and notable for harassing meter readers in Keene.
    But as a general tendency, I think the folks who’ve moved there have more or less just blended in.
    I’m not sure how you’d tell the difference between somebody who moved to NH to forge a libertarian lifestyle, and somebody who just happened to be from there. I guess initially their accent would be a little different, but over time even that would probably just start to blend in.
    Live free or die! as they say up there.

  466. There has been an effort to turn NH into a libertarian state for a while now. They’ve made some progress. NH is a place that is quite congenial for libertarians.
    As a movement, they’re most visible and notable for harassing meter readers in Keene.
    But as a general tendency, I think the folks who’ve moved there have more or less just blended in.
    I’m not sure how you’d tell the difference between somebody who moved to NH to forge a libertarian lifestyle, and somebody who just happened to be from there. I guess initially their accent would be a little different, but over time even that would probably just start to blend in.
    Live free or die! as they say up there.

  467. As a movement, they’re most visible and notable for harassing meter readers in Keene.
    The only “harassing” I’ve heard of is that of staying ahead of the meter readers to pop nickels in expired meters.

  468. As a movement, they’re most visible and notable for harassing meter readers in Keene.
    The only “harassing” I’ve heard of is that of staying ahead of the meter readers to pop nickels in expired meters.

  469. They have strong views on immigration (pro)
    As long as the they are highly skilled, docile wrt labor rights, and not eligible for citizenship….all is cool.
    the safety net (they want one)
    As long as it is small, means and drug tested and a bit on the cheap side…OK!
    climate change (they believe in it)
    Until the time comes to adopt an actual effective policy to combat it…yes!
    globalization (it’s here to stay)
    As long as it benefits me, it’s just ducky! Others–go suck eggs.
    and Russia (against).
    Gotta’a have a bugaboo to justify all that defense spending to keep the business community afloat.
    …also generally against the following:
    abortion rights
    labor rights
    actual full employment policies
    They also generally plumped for austerity as a fiscal response to the crash of 2008, and buy in to the concept of the “inevitable crisis of entitlement spending” (Pete Peterson propaganda).
    Further, when pressed, they are really really not all that keen on the basic concepts underlying the New Deal regulatory state.
    But other than that…reasonable people!
    Kasich is a classic example. He is an asshole.
    Have a good day, wj. 🙂
    Regards,

  470. They have strong views on immigration (pro)
    As long as the they are highly skilled, docile wrt labor rights, and not eligible for citizenship….all is cool.
    the safety net (they want one)
    As long as it is small, means and drug tested and a bit on the cheap side…OK!
    climate change (they believe in it)
    Until the time comes to adopt an actual effective policy to combat it…yes!
    globalization (it’s here to stay)
    As long as it benefits me, it’s just ducky! Others–go suck eggs.
    and Russia (against).
    Gotta’a have a bugaboo to justify all that defense spending to keep the business community afloat.
    …also generally against the following:
    abortion rights
    labor rights
    actual full employment policies
    They also generally plumped for austerity as a fiscal response to the crash of 2008, and buy in to the concept of the “inevitable crisis of entitlement spending” (Pete Peterson propaganda).
    Further, when pressed, they are really really not all that keen on the basic concepts underlying the New Deal regulatory state.
    But other than that…reasonable people!
    Kasich is a classic example. He is an asshole.
    Have a good day, wj. 🙂
    Regards,

  473. Meanwhile, since this is an open thread, excellent news from the other side of the world. Cardinal George Pell has been charged with historic child abuse, and is having to go to Australia to face the charges. This gives me a chance to post a link to a single by the wonderful Tim Minchin, which I believe he wrote, recorded and put up in one day last year in order for the proceeds to go towards paying for airfares to Rome for all the historic victims whose cases had been brushed under the carpet by Pell, and who had been made to sign confidentiality agreements after paltry payouts, when he refused to come back to Australia to testify before a public enquiry on the grounds of ill health. He was allowed to testify in the Vatican, where of course few if any of the victims would have been able to attend, so enter Tim Minchin:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtHOmforqxk

  474. Meanwhile, since this is an open thread, excellent news from the other side of the world. Cardinal George Pell has been charged with historic child abuse, and is having to go to Australia to face the charges. This gives me a chance to post a link to a single by the wonderful Tim Minchin, which I believe he wrote, recorded and put up in one day last year in order for the proceeds to go towards paying for airfares to Rome for all the historic victims whose cases had been brushed under the carpet by Pell, and who had been made to sign confidentiality agreements after paltry payouts, when he refused to come back to Australia to testify before a public enquiry on the grounds of ill health. He was allowed to testify in the Vatican, where of course few if any of the victims would have been able to attend, so enter Tim Minchin:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtHOmforqxk

  475. I’m out of New York Times freebies at the moment. But the activists are off base if they’re directly confronting or otherwise making the meter readers’ jobs difficult.

  476. I’m out of New York Times freebies at the moment. But the activists are off base if they’re directly confronting or otherwise making the meter readers’ jobs difficult.

  477. Let’s see, Bobby:

    1. (immigration): No We can’t handle unlimited immigration. But we can handle, indeed we need, more immigrants than we currently permit.
      And if we are going to persist in unnecessarily restricted immigration, enforcement has to start with the folks hiring the illegal immigrants. If they aren’t hurting, a lot and personally, for breaking the law, then enforcement is nonsense.
    2. (safety net): No. We need a better one than we have now. And not just on medical care (see “full employment, below).
    3. climate change): No. We ought to be doing something about it. It will cost money, both government funding for some things, and private money (i.e. increased costs for some things). But it needs to be done. The alternative being to pay more later to try (probably unsuccessfully) to mitigate the damage which was not prevented.
    4. (globalization): It is indeed here to stay. We need to do more to address the negative side effects. But trying to reverse it is only going to make everybody (except, perhaps, the very rich) worse off.
    5. (Russia): Not really. Russia is a real (not bugaboo) threat. They work at it — IMHO for the same reasons that Trump acts like a bully: severe inferiority complex . . . rooted in the reality of being inferior.

    What you have laid out is a combination of a reactionary (and unrealistic) worldview, combined with bits of extreme (and also unrealistic) libertarianism.
    As for the rest:

    • abortion rights: should have figured out long ago that the need for government intervention in these kinds of medical decisions is minimal.
      When the fetus reaches the point of being viable outside the womb without massive medical intervention, that’s another story. One which needs to be addressed by improved adoption support — which is something we need anyway. Our foster-care system as it currently stands just isn’t getting the job done.
    • labor rights: not entirely sure where you are going with this. I’m opposed to public sector unions. But private sector ones should be up to those involved. If that is what you meant.
    • actual full employment policies: I can see some government policies to provide a better safety net for the unemployed than, for example, (falsely) claiming disability. Like retraining, and perhaps relocation, assistance. But beyond that, as long as you recognize that “full employment” means an unemployment rate of around 4%-5%, not 0%, I don’t really have a problem with it.

    So how far off the same page are we?

  478. Let’s see, Bobby:

    1. (immigration): No We can’t handle unlimited immigration. But we can handle, indeed we need, more immigrants than we currently permit.
      And if we are going to persist in unnecessarily restricted immigration, enforcement has to start with the folks hiring the illegal immigrants. If they aren’t hurting, a lot and personally, for breaking the law, then enforcement is nonsense.
    2. (safety net): No. We need a better one than we have now. And not just on medical care (see “full employment, below).
    3. climate change): No. We ought to be doing something about it. It will cost money, both government funding for some things, and private money (i.e. increased costs for some things). But it needs to be done. The alternative being to pay more later to try (probably unsuccessfully) to mitigate the damage which was not prevented.
    4. (globalization): It is indeed here to stay. We need to do more to address the negative side effects. But trying to reverse it is only going to make everybody (except, perhaps, the very rich) worse off.
    5. (Russia): Not really. Russia is a real (not bugaboo) threat. They work at it — IMHO for the same reasons that Trump acts like a bully: severe inferiority complex . . . rooted in the reality of being inferior.

    What you have laid out is a combination of a reactionary (and unrealistic) worldview, combined with bits of extreme (and also unrealistic) libertarianism.
    As for the rest:

    • abortion rights: should have figured out long ago that the need for government intervention in these kinds of medical decisions is minimal.
      When the fetus reaches the point of being viable outside the womb without massive medical intervention, that’s another story. One which needs to be addressed by improved adoption support — which is something we need anyway. Our foster-care system as it currently stands just isn’t getting the job done.
    • labor rights: not entirely sure where you are going with this. I’m opposed to public sector unions. But private sector ones should be up to those involved. If that is what you meant.
    • actual full employment policies: I can see some government policies to provide a better safety net for the unemployed than, for example, (falsely) claiming disability. Like retraining, and perhaps relocation, assistance. But beyond that, as long as you recognize that “full employment” means an unemployment rate of around 4%-5%, not 0%, I don’t really have a problem with it.

    So how far off the same page are we?

  481. the activists are off base if they’re directly confronting or otherwise making the meter readers’ jobs difficult.
    Well, they sorta are off base, but I don’t think it’s because they’re libertarian, specifically.
    Some folks are just nutty.

  482. the activists are off base if they’re directly confronting or otherwise making the meter readers’ jobs difficult.
    Well, they sorta are off base, but I don’t think it’s because they’re libertarian, specifically.
    Some folks are just nutty.

  483. This probably deserves its own thread, but I don’t have the time right now to jump over the Typepad.
    16 years seems long enough for such an open-ended authorization, it seems to me.

  484. This probably deserves its own thread, but I don’t have the time right now to jump over the Typepad.
    16 years seems long enough for such an open-ended authorization, it seems to me.

  485. Weren’t libertarians telling us just the other few minutes ago that the best way to allocate and ration a scarce resource like parking spaces is to make us pay for them, and jack the price up at peak parking hours?
    Or am I getting them mixed up with the Rosicrucianists?
    I knew a guy once (no, I didn’t, but I expect to before long, should trump and republicans remain in office) who managed to find and ration parking places on behalf of himself by rolling down his car window and showing a loaded pistol to other drivers competing for the same space.
    GFTNC:
    Thanks to cleek, I can now reveal to you how the Pell child molestation scandal is being spun to sizable audiences of drooling right wing (insert whatever you want) by right wing media in America, including the occupants of the White House:
    see the linked video in cleek’s post:
    http://ok-cleek.com/blogs/?p=26234
    We have an interplanetary scandal on our hands and it’s the fault of the entire moderate left cited by the NRA’s Dana Loesch as targets for gunfire.

  486. Weren’t libertarians telling us just the other few minutes ago that the best way to allocate and ration a scarce resource like parking spaces is to make us pay for them, and jack the price up at peak parking hours?
    Or am I getting them mixed up with the Rosicrucianists?
    I knew a guy once (no, I didn’t, but I expect to before long, should trump and republicans remain in office) who managed to find and ration parking places on behalf of himself by rolling down his car window and showing a loaded pistol to other drivers competing for the same space.
    GFTNC:
    Thanks to cleek, I can now reveal to you how the Pell child molestation scandal is being spun to sizable audiences of drooling right wing (insert whatever you want) by right wing media in America, including the occupants of the White House:
    see the linked video in cleek’s post:
    http://ok-cleek.com/blogs/?p=26234
    We have an interplanetary scandal on our hands and it’s the fault of the entire moderate left cited by the NRA’s Dana Loesch as targets for gunfire.

  487. via Charles Pierce, a tweet from Yoni Applebaum quoting E.P. Whipple’s assessment of
    Andrew Johnson trump:
    “Insincere as well as stubborn, cunning as well as unreasonable, vain as well as ill-tempered, greedy of popularity as well as arbitrary in disposition, veering in his mind as well as fixed in his will, he unites in his character the seemingly opposite qualities of demagogue and autocrat, and converts the Presidential chair into a stump or a throne, according as the impulse seizes him to cajole or to command. Doubtless much of the evil developed in him is due to his misfortune in having been lifted by events to a position which he lacked the elevation and breadth of intelligence adequately to fill. He was cursed with the possession of a power and authority which no man of narrow mind, bitter prejudices, and inordinate self-estimation can exercise without depraving himself as well as injuring the nation. Egotistic to the point of mental disease, he resented the direct and manly opposition of statesmen to his opinions and moods as a personal affront, and descended to the last degree of littleness in a political leader, — that of betraying his party, in order to gratify his spite. He of course became the prey of intriguers and sycophants, — of persons who understand the art of managing minds which are at once arbitrary and weak, by allowing them to retain unity of will amid the most palpable inconsistencies of opinion, so that inconstancy to principle shall not weaken force of purpose, nor the emphasis be at all abated with which they may bless to-day what yesterday they cursed. Thus the abhorrer of traitors has now become their tool. Thus the denouncer of Copperheads has now sunk into dependence on their support. Thus the imposer of conditions of reconstruction has now become the fore- most friend of the unconditioned return of the Rebel States. Thus the furious Union Republican, whose harangues against his political opponents almost scared his political friends by their violence, has now become the shameless betrayer of the people who trusted him. And in all these changes of base he has appeared supremely conscious, in his own mind, of playing an independent, a consistent, and especially a conscientious part.”
    At least Johnson ascended to the Presidency through the honest American way, via assassination, rather than stealing an entire election by teaming up with a foreign power.

  488. via Charles Pierce, a tweet from Yoni Applebaum quoting E.P. Whipple’s assessment of
    Andrew Johnson trump:
    “Insincere as well as stubborn, cunning as well as unreasonable, vain as well as ill-tempered, greedy of popularity as well as arbitrary in disposition, veering in his mind as well as fixed in his will, he unites in his character the seemingly opposite qualities of demagogue and autocrat, and converts the Presidential chair into a stump or a throne, according as the impulse seizes him to cajole or to command. Doubtless much of the evil developed in him is due to his misfortune in having been lifted by events to a position which he lacked the elevation and breadth of intelligence adequately to fill. He was cursed with the possession of a power and authority which no man of narrow mind, bitter prejudices, and inordinate self-estimation can exercise without depraving himself as well as injuring the nation. Egotistic to the point of mental disease, he resented the direct and manly opposition of statesmen to his opinions and moods as a personal affront, and descended to the last degree of littleness in a political leader, — that of betraying his party, in order to gratify his spite. He of course became the prey of intriguers and sycophants, — of persons who understand the art of managing minds which are at once arbitrary and weak, by allowing them to retain unity of will amid the most palpable inconsistencies of opinion, so that inconstancy to principle shall not weaken force of purpose, nor the emphasis be at all abated with which they may bless to-day what yesterday they cursed. Thus the abhorrer of traitors has now become their tool. Thus the denouncer of Copperheads has now sunk into dependence on their support. Thus the imposer of conditions of reconstruction has now become the fore- most friend of the unconditioned return of the Rebel States. Thus the furious Union Republican, whose harangues against his political opponents almost scared his political friends by their violence, has now become the shameless betrayer of the people who trusted him. And in all these changes of base he has appeared supremely conscious, in his own mind, of playing an independent, a consistent, and especially a conscientious part.”
    At least Johnson ascended to the Presidency through the honest American way, via assassination, rather than stealing an entire election by teaming up with a foreign power.

  489. Count, I had read that post over at cleek’s, but not watched the clip – thanks for making me do it. The whole Alex Jones situation, of course, leaves one speechless. I truly don’t know what to say about the general fact that anybody takes this lunatic seriously…
    As for your Whipple quote above, it is simply terrific. I think I read it somewhere before, but it certainly bears re-reading, and is eerily suitable to current times.

  490. Count, I had read that post over at cleek’s, but not watched the clip – thanks for making me do it. The whole Alex Jones situation, of course, leaves one speechless. I truly don’t know what to say about the general fact that anybody takes this lunatic seriously…
    As for your Whipple quote above, it is simply terrific. I think I read it somewhere before, but it certainly bears re-reading, and is eerily suitable to current times.

  491. “At least Johnson ascended to the Presidency through the honest American way, via assassination, rather than stealing an entire election by teaming up with a foreign power.”
    Uh, are you sure that there wasn’t foreign collusion in that assassination? It seems like a not uncommon occurrence in the world at large.

  492. “At least Johnson ascended to the Presidency through the honest American way, via assassination, rather than stealing an entire election by teaming up with a foreign power.”
    Uh, are you sure that there wasn’t foreign collusion in that assassination? It seems like a not uncommon occurrence in the world at large.

  493. Well, John Wilkes Booth, father of the modern republican party, hailed from the slave-owning border state of Maryland, which did not (with considerable pressure from the Union) secede to join the Confederacy, a self proclaimed foreign power for whom Booth’s bullets accomplished their bidding.
    True, the Booth family hailed originally from England, a foreign power.
    Now, if you examine the noxious influence of the Scots/Irish (excluding poetry, good whiskey, fine tenors, and public farting) on the chief sins of America’s rise to prominence, continuing to this day, you may concede that we have been under the sway of foreign powers from day numero uno.

  494. Well, John Wilkes Booth, father of the modern republican party, hailed from the slave-owning border state of Maryland, which did not (with considerable pressure from the Union) secede to join the Confederacy, a self proclaimed foreign power for whom Booth’s bullets accomplished their bidding.
    True, the Booth family hailed originally from England, a foreign power.
    Now, if you examine the noxious influence of the Scots/Irish (excluding poetry, good whiskey, fine tenors, and public farting) on the chief sins of America’s rise to prominence, continuing to this day, you may concede that we have been under the sway of foreign powers from day numero uno.

  499. Haven’t read the entire article at bobbyp’s link, but can I just say how much I despise the phrase “thought leaders”? Anyone who uses it instantly gains my mistrust. After my company was taken over by sales/marketing minds, I used to edit stuff for them that was constructed of long strings of such empty phrases. Part of the rot that goes so deep is the misuse of language to mislead and befuddle. Grrrrrrr.

  500. Haven’t read the entire article at bobbyp’s link, but can I just say how much I despise the phrase “thought leaders”? Anyone who uses it instantly gains my mistrust. After my company was taken over by sales/marketing minds, I used to edit stuff for them that was constructed of long strings of such empty phrases. Part of the rot that goes so deep is the misuse of language to mislead and befuddle. Grrrrrrr.

  501. Tiny in some places — of that I have no doubt. But actually fairly numerous around here.
    I think I mentioned that my state Assemblywoman is a Republican. In this district where the Democrats outnumber the Republicans by nearly 2 to 1 (and independents are around 1/3 of the total). She’s pro-choice, believes the safety net needs improvement not elimination, etc.
    Granted, California’s “top-two” primary system means that she can get nominated without winning a strictly Republican primary. On the other hand, lots of similar places with that system manage to nominate two Democrats to run in the general election. Cf California’s most recent contest for the US Senate seat.
    I’m not arguing against your thesis that the rot is deep. Just that it is a long way from universal.
    It looks, around here, like we are seeing an increasing number of what one of my liberal friends once called “tolerant conservatives.” Which I would consider more like “non-reactionary conservatives.” It’s a philosophy of making change when necessary, but not just for the sake of change. Of allowing others to live their lives as they wish, to the extend that them doing so does not negatively impact others. I think it grows, in part, out of experience at the local level, where the more wild-eyes bits of current “conservative” orthodoxy do not survive encountering the real world. (See the experience of Colorado Springs linked to above.)

  502. Tiny in some places — of that I have no doubt. But actually fairly numerous around here.
    I think I mentioned that my state Assemblywoman is a Republican. In this district where the Democrats outnumber the Republicans by nearly 2 to 1 (and independents are around 1/3 of the total). She’s pro-choice, believes the safety net needs improvement not elimination, etc.
    Granted, California’s “top-two” primary system means that she can get nominated without winning a strictly Republican primary. On the other hand, lots of similar places with that system manage to nominate two Democrats to run in the general election. Cf California’s most recent contest for the US Senate seat.
    I’m not arguing against your thesis that the rot is deep. Just that it is a long way from universal.
    It looks, around here, like we are seeing an increasing number of what one of my liberal friends once called “tolerant conservatives.” Which I would consider more like “non-reactionary conservatives.” It’s a philosophy of making change when necessary, but not just for the sake of change. Of allowing others to live their lives as they wish, to the extend that them doing so does not negatively impact others. I think it grows, in part, out of experience at the local level, where the more wild-eyes bits of current “conservative” orthodoxy do not survive encountering the real world. (See the experience of Colorado Springs linked to above.)

  503. Yes, well the entire real world is about to get a bellyful of wild-eyed bits of current conservative “orthodoxy” that have escaped their local enclaves to being ruination on every front:
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-trumps-disastrous-secret-drug-war-plans-for-central-america?via=newsletter&source=Weekend
    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/06/oh-good-maniac-is-plotting-trade-war.html
    https://www.axios.com/exclusive-trump-plots-trade-wars-2450764900.html
    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/07/03/the-diplomat-who-defied-the-administration
    http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/06/30/trump-isnt-draining-the-swamp-hes-drowning-diplomacy/
    Declare economic and military war on multiple fronts as you dismantle the entire diplomatic apparatus.
    I hope conservatives enjoy thermonuclear war coming right on their heads here, because I’m willing to perish in that conflagration if means the entire worldwide reactionary conservative movement is incinerated once and for all.
    I suppose it’s nice however, that assholes, jagoffs, and sociopaths have been temporarily sidelines in Colorado Springs.

  504. Yes, well the entire real world is about to get a bellyful of wild-eyed bits of current conservative “orthodoxy” that have escaped their local enclaves to being ruination on every front:
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-trumps-disastrous-secret-drug-war-plans-for-central-america?via=newsletter&source=Weekend
    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/06/oh-good-maniac-is-plotting-trade-war.html
    https://www.axios.com/exclusive-trump-plots-trade-wars-2450764900.html
    http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/07/03/the-diplomat-who-defied-the-administration
    http://washingtonmonthly.com/2017/06/30/trump-isnt-draining-the-swamp-hes-drowning-diplomacy/
    Declare economic and military war on multiple fronts as you dismantle the entire diplomatic apparatus.
    I hope conservatives enjoy thermonuclear war coming right on their heads here, because I’m willing to perish in that conflagration if means the entire worldwide reactionary conservative movement is incinerated once and for all.
    I suppose it’s nice however, that assholes, jagoffs, and sociopaths have been temporarily sidelines in Colorado Springs.

  505. it’s a shame the GOP is dominated by the insane wing of the GOP. the need to deny them any more seats in any legislature keeps from even considering sane Republicans.

  506. it’s a shame the GOP is dominated by the insane wing of the GOP. the need to deny them any more seats in any legislature keeps from even considering sane Republicans.

  507. The trouble is, if you refuse to elect sane Republicans, where is the incentive for the more extreme voters to turn away from the nutjobs? After all, they are going to lose anyway.
    If you are willing to elect a sane Republican, at least there is some reason for them, however reluctantly, to nominate one.

  508. The trouble is, if you refuse to elect sane Republicans, where is the incentive for the more extreme voters to turn away from the nutjobs? After all, they are going to lose anyway.
    If you are willing to elect a sane Republican, at least there is some reason for them, however reluctantly, to nominate one.

  513. if i was in NY or CA or someplace i could maybe justify a vote for a reasonable Republican over a crappy Dem just for the sake of balance. but the NC GOP is pretty scummy – and they have a veto-proof majority right now.
    come on SCOTUS, let’s kill some gerrymanders!

  514. if i was in NY or CA or someplace i could maybe justify a vote for a reasonable Republican over a crappy Dem just for the sake of balance. but the NC GOP is pretty scummy – and they have a veto-proof majority right now.
    come on SCOTUS, let’s kill some gerrymanders!

  515. So then you work at the city and county level.
    I do understand that I’ve got a luxury at the state level that does not obtain everywhere. But you gotta start somewhere. Otherwise you leave us in a place where, when the democrats go off the rails, there is nobody sensible to turn to.

  516. So then you work at the city and county level.
    I do understand that I’ve got a luxury at the state level that does not obtain everywhere. But you gotta start somewhere. Otherwise you leave us in a place where, when the democrats go off the rails, there is nobody sensible to turn to.

  517. But you gotta start somewhere. Otherwise you leave us in a place where, when the democrats go off the rails, there is nobody sensible to turn to.
    I think it’s you who’s gotta start somewhere. It’s your party, not mine. If I’m going to expend my own little quantum of effort trying to keep the whole system from going [further] off the rails, why would I expend it trying to get the party I don’t like anyhow back on the rails, instead of trying to keep the party I’m at least okay with from going off them?
    I don’t mean this as snarkily as it sounds. I just don’t see the logic.

  518. But you gotta start somewhere. Otherwise you leave us in a place where, when the democrats go off the rails, there is nobody sensible to turn to.
    I think it’s you who’s gotta start somewhere. It’s your party, not mine. If I’m going to expend my own little quantum of effort trying to keep the whole system from going [further] off the rails, why would I expend it trying to get the party I don’t like anyhow back on the rails, instead of trying to keep the party I’m at least okay with from going off them?
    I don’t mean this as snarkily as it sounds. I just don’t see the logic.

  519. The logic, as I see it, is the good of the country. Which sounds both more pompous and snarkier than I intend. The country needs two viable “parties of government” — that is, parties capable of governing. Somehow, I can’t see you arguing that the past half year demonstrate that that fits the current Republican Party at the national level.
    I’m not suggesting anything so radical as working for a party with which you disagree. But there will be occasions, surely, when the Democrats have put up a poor candidate. Then you face a choice between going straight tribal, and voting for him anyway. Or giving the Republican a look, to see if he might be acceptable.
    Note that this also serves your desired end of keeping your own party from going off the rails. If crazy candidates will lose, there is an incentive not to nominate one — in the Democratic Party, too.

  520. The logic, as I see it, is the good of the country. Which sounds both more pompous and snarkier than I intend. The country needs two viable “parties of government” — that is, parties capable of governing. Somehow, I can’t see you arguing that the past half year demonstrate that that fits the current Republican Party at the national level.
    I’m not suggesting anything so radical as working for a party with which you disagree. But there will be occasions, surely, when the Democrats have put up a poor candidate. Then you face a choice between going straight tribal, and voting for him anyway. Or giving the Republican a look, to see if he might be acceptable.
    Note that this also serves your desired end of keeping your own party from going off the rails. If crazy candidates will lose, there is an incentive not to nominate one — in the Democratic Party, too.

  521. Not sure what to say, wj. I don’t agree with Republicans, even when they’re nice people. I am hugely grateful to Evan McMullen, for example, for being a patriot, and for calling out Trump. But the domestic policies he supports are, to my way of thinking, wrongheaded. I don’t want a tax cut and less government (assuming responsible government, not the Trump appointees). The fact that so many elected Republicans are completely off the rails – of course, it’s my problem. But I can’t solve it by becoming a “wj Republican”.

  522. Not sure what to say, wj. I don’t agree with Republicans, even when they’re nice people. I am hugely grateful to Evan McMullen, for example, for being a patriot, and for calling out Trump. But the domestic policies he supports are, to my way of thinking, wrongheaded. I don’t want a tax cut and less government (assuming responsible government, not the Trump appointees). The fact that so many elected Republicans are completely off the rails – of course, it’s my problem. But I can’t solve it by becoming a “wj Republican”.

  523. I must be being exceptionally unclear today. I’m not trying to suggest that those of you who are liberals should become “wj Republicans”. Just as I don’t buy the suggestion that those of us Republicans who reject the KnowNothings and reactionaries should become Democrats.
    All I am saying is that we need to embrace the concept that voting for a (relatively) moderate member of the other party is not anathema. Doing so doesn’t even require us to first decide that we are “independents.”
    Perhaps an example will help. I never even considered voting for Senator Boxer. Just way too many areas of disagreement. But I could, and sometimes have, voted for Senator Feinstein in preference to some incompetent nutcase that my party put up. Similarly for a raft of state (and local) elections.
    I get there are cases where, as cleek observed, considerations of control of the legislature may intrude. But surely there are, in most parts of the country, some races where voting for the individual rather than the party is possible. And, I submit, doing so can have positive effects beyond the particular office in question.

  524. I must be being exceptionally unclear today. I’m not trying to suggest that those of you who are liberals should become “wj Republicans”. Just as I don’t buy the suggestion that those of us Republicans who reject the KnowNothings and reactionaries should become Democrats.
    All I am saying is that we need to embrace the concept that voting for a (relatively) moderate member of the other party is not anathema. Doing so doesn’t even require us to first decide that we are “independents.”
    Perhaps an example will help. I never even considered voting for Senator Boxer. Just way too many areas of disagreement. But I could, and sometimes have, voted for Senator Feinstein in preference to some incompetent nutcase that my party put up. Similarly for a raft of state (and local) elections.
    I get there are cases where, as cleek observed, considerations of control of the legislature may intrude. But surely there are, in most parts of the country, some races where voting for the individual rather than the party is possible. And, I submit, doing so can have positive effects beyond the particular office in question.

  525. i voted for bill weld rather than john silber for MA governor in (IIRC) ’90.
    i’ve probably voted for (R)’s for local town offices, because they don’t usually run for those on a party basis (now there’s an idea!).
    i could imagine voting for a (R) state house rep or senator. it depends.
    for that matter, my US house rep (Moulton) could pass pretty easily for a (R) is saner times.
    but then, Obama could have passed for a (R) in saner times.
    with all due respect, I’m with Janie. I don’t see it as being on me to build a better (R) party.
    Not my circus, as they say.
    and (D)’s going off the rails is the least of our worries, as far as I can tell.
    the (R)’s have gone over to some weird reactionary dark side. not my doing, and i’m not in any position to fix it.
    you and mck and marty take it on.

  526. i voted for bill weld rather than john silber for MA governor in (IIRC) ’90.
    i’ve probably voted for (R)’s for local town offices, because they don’t usually run for those on a party basis (now there’s an idea!).
    i could imagine voting for a (R) state house rep or senator. it depends.
    for that matter, my US house rep (Moulton) could pass pretty easily for a (R) is saner times.
    but then, Obama could have passed for a (R) in saner times.
    with all due respect, I’m with Janie. I don’t see it as being on me to build a better (R) party.
    Not my circus, as they say.
    and (D)’s going off the rails is the least of our worries, as far as I can tell.
    the (R)’s have gone over to some weird reactionary dark side. not my doing, and i’m not in any position to fix it.
    you and mck and marty take it on.

  527. If we manage to survive the current administration, forestall the efforts at voter suppression, etc., there will be a rebalancing of the parties eventually. Look at what has happened to party allegiance in the South in my lifetime.
    When that happens, if we still have Ds and Rs but people shifting between them, it will be middle-of-the-road Democrats sliding across the center line, not people as far to the left of center as I am. There’s no way, policy-wise, I would ever ever vote for a Republican to go to Washington, even if I hadn’t made that promise to myself when we went to war in Iraq.
    I have voted for the local R to go to the state legislature a few times — but only in circumstances like wj describes with Feinstein vs a very extreme R. The R I voted for was well-known and respected statewide as a moderate centrist who was instrumental in keeping Maine’s budget negotiations going for many terms. Look what’s happened now that he’s retired from the legislature!! (We are in the first day of a state shutdown.) (It didn’t hurt his chances of getting my vote that he was one of the guys who played basketball in “my” barn for twenty years. Not to mention that when the legislature voted on same-sex marriage in 2009, he gave an eloquent speech in favor, despite the pressure he was under to vote the other way.)
    Susan Collins is an interesting study in relation to wj’s idea. She gets a lot of press for doing things like promising to vote against a motion to proceed on the health “care” bill the men in charge have concocted behind closed doors. She then gets almost no press when the bills are tweaked slightly and she votes for them in the end anyhow. So even a so-called “moderate” like Collins doesn’t have any impact in the direction(s) I want to see, either policy-wise or off-the-rails-wise.

  528. If we manage to survive the current administration, forestall the efforts at voter suppression, etc., there will be a rebalancing of the parties eventually. Look at what has happened to party allegiance in the South in my lifetime.
    When that happens, if we still have Ds and Rs but people shifting between them, it will be middle-of-the-road Democrats sliding across the center line, not people as far to the left of center as I am. There’s no way, policy-wise, I would ever ever vote for a Republican to go to Washington, even if I hadn’t made that promise to myself when we went to war in Iraq.
    I have voted for the local R to go to the state legislature a few times — but only in circumstances like wj describes with Feinstein vs a very extreme R. The R I voted for was well-known and respected statewide as a moderate centrist who was instrumental in keeping Maine’s budget negotiations going for many terms. Look what’s happened now that he’s retired from the legislature!! (We are in the first day of a state shutdown.) (It didn’t hurt his chances of getting my vote that he was one of the guys who played basketball in “my” barn for twenty years. Not to mention that when the legislature voted on same-sex marriage in 2009, he gave an eloquent speech in favor, despite the pressure he was under to vote the other way.)
    Susan Collins is an interesting study in relation to wj’s idea. She gets a lot of press for doing things like promising to vote against a motion to proceed on the health “care” bill the men in charge have concocted behind closed doors. She then gets almost no press when the bills are tweaked slightly and she votes for them in the end anyhow. So even a so-called “moderate” like Collins doesn’t have any impact in the direction(s) I want to see, either policy-wise or off-the-rails-wise.

  529. What is paid for in single payer countries:
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/07/a-very-brief-primer-on-single-payer-health-care/
    Marty, for example, will sign up for single payer health insurance called Medicare (not mandatory, mind you), with a supplemental policy at comparably low cost if he so chooses, in a few years.
    He will so choose.
    So will McKT.
    The republican party will try to take it away from them, or at least make the cost to Marty so onerous that he throws up his hands and moves to Canada, Switzerland, or France, from whence he’ll blog to us how great it is compared to Obamacare.
    I will not call the two of them socialists, parasites, or welfare queens.

  530. What is paid for in single payer countries:
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/07/a-very-brief-primer-on-single-payer-health-care/
    Marty, for example, will sign up for single payer health insurance called Medicare (not mandatory, mind you), with a supplemental policy at comparably low cost if he so chooses, in a few years.
    He will so choose.
    So will McKT.
    The republican party will try to take it away from them, or at least make the cost to Marty so onerous that he throws up his hands and moves to Canada, Switzerland, or France, from whence he’ll blog to us how great it is compared to Obamacare.
    I will not call the two of them socialists, parasites, or welfare queens.

  531. Obama could have passed for a (R) in saner times.
    It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.

  532. Obama could have passed for a (R) in saner times.
    It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.

  533. It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.
    Yes. Quite a few people I know think he was a wild-eyed flaming socialist. What does that say about the Overton window?

  534. It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.
    Yes. Quite a few people I know think he was a wild-eyed flaming socialist. What does that say about the Overton window?

  535. “saner times”
    I’m trying to pin down when that was.
    Perhaps the 1950s, but neither party would have had him as a national candidate for the usual reasons.
    The 1960’s? Not sane times.
    A running mate for Richard Nixon? Not likely.
    Maybe 1976, but after Reagan’s racist fat black welfare queen bullshit, Obama would have bolted the republican party.
    Since then, Reagan, Gingrich, Bush and now the catastrophe.
    You think he could have bookended J.C. Watts during the 1990s on that team of dyspeptic thieves?
    But, yes, Obama, by just about any measure, is a moderate guy on just about all of the issues.
    And yes, the republican party is nuts beyond anything any of the decent ones would have conceived of in earlier times.
    I’m for a two party system, too, I suppose. The Democratic Party and another one.
    This “R” thing needs to be disbanded, defunded, and harassed by force out of existence, much as the American Nazi and Communist parties were, though the Nazis seemed to have suited up for a reprise.
    The lot of them can join their kidnapped children in the sex slave camps on Mars.

  536. “saner times”
    I’m trying to pin down when that was.
    Perhaps the 1950s, but neither party would have had him as a national candidate for the usual reasons.
    The 1960’s? Not sane times.
    A running mate for Richard Nixon? Not likely.
    Maybe 1976, but after Reagan’s racist fat black welfare queen bullshit, Obama would have bolted the republican party.
    Since then, Reagan, Gingrich, Bush and now the catastrophe.
    You think he could have bookended J.C. Watts during the 1990s on that team of dyspeptic thieves?
    But, yes, Obama, by just about any measure, is a moderate guy on just about all of the issues.
    And yes, the republican party is nuts beyond anything any of the decent ones would have conceived of in earlier times.
    I’m for a two party system, too, I suppose. The Democratic Party and another one.
    This “R” thing needs to be disbanded, defunded, and harassed by force out of existence, much as the American Nazi and Communist parties were, though the Nazis seemed to have suited up for a reprise.
    The lot of them can join their kidnapped children in the sex slave camps on Mars.

  537. Count, that’s saner times. Which is, let’s face it, a pretty low bar.
    That said, if you look past Obama’s permanent suntan, he’s a pretty generic Republican (outside the South) any time before 1994. Which is what I, at least, consider times.

  538. Count, that’s saner times. Which is, let’s face it, a pretty low bar.
    That said, if you look past Obama’s permanent suntan, he’s a pretty generic Republican (outside the South) any time before 1994. Which is what I, at least, consider times.

  539. That said, if you look past Obama’s permanent suntan, he’s a pretty generic Republican (outside the South) any time before 1994.
    That’s really not true. Obama was not Ronald Reagan. Period.

  540. That said, if you look past Obama’s permanent suntan, he’s a pretty generic Republican (outside the South) any time before 1994.
    That’s really not true. Obama was not Ronald Reagan. Period.

  541. It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.
    There is no, none, nada, group of ‘sane’ Republicans who would have initiated and passed the most earth shaking safety net program in over 50 years.
    NONE.
    To call Obama a ‘Republican’ in all but name is also a favorite pastime of the atomistic self indulgent left. Now I see it is adopted by so-called reasonable conservatives. It is a misguided analysis.
    It’s like saying Romneycare is a “Heritage Plan”. You mean the program that was passed in MA by a veto proof Democratic Party controlled legislature over repeated vetoes by some guy named Romney?
    Really?
    People tend to forget that Joe fucking Lieberman cast his vote in the Senate for the ACA. Without his vote, it is not passed.
    Look….a two party system is baked into the cake under the Constitution. So you gotta’ pick one. If you vote for the so-called reasonable GOP asshole, then you are effectively endorsing the GOP program because that asshole will caucus with the GOP and if they run things, they will pass reactionary GOP legislation.
    But then I guess you get to sleep well and make highly principled sounding noises that you “voted for the candidate, not the party”.
    Sorry. I could not disagree more.

  542. It’s amazing how few people can, or perhaps how few are willing to, see that reality.
    There is no, none, nada, group of ‘sane’ Republicans who would have initiated and passed the most earth shaking safety net program in over 50 years.
    NONE.
    To call Obama a ‘Republican’ in all but name is also a favorite pastime of the atomistic self indulgent left. Now I see it is adopted by so-called reasonable conservatives. It is a misguided analysis.
    It’s like saying Romneycare is a “Heritage Plan”. You mean the program that was passed in MA by a veto proof Democratic Party controlled legislature over repeated vetoes by some guy named Romney?
    Really?
    People tend to forget that Joe fucking Lieberman cast his vote in the Senate for the ACA. Without his vote, it is not passed.
    Look….a two party system is baked into the cake under the Constitution. So you gotta’ pick one. If you vote for the so-called reasonable GOP asshole, then you are effectively endorsing the GOP program because that asshole will caucus with the GOP and if they run things, they will pass reactionary GOP legislation.
    But then I guess you get to sleep well and make highly principled sounding noises that you “voted for the candidate, not the party”.
    Sorry. I could not disagree more.

  545. Take a look at this clip of Everett Dirkson, hero of the “reasonable right.”
    His line of political hogwash is virtually indistinguishable from what you hear from nearly all current crop of Republicans.
    The tune may vary, but the message is unchanged.

  546. Take a look at this clip of Everett Dirkson, hero of the “reasonable right.”
    His line of political hogwash is virtually indistinguishable from what you hear from nearly all current crop of Republicans.
    The tune may vary, but the message is unchanged.

  547. That’s really not true. Obama was not Ronald Reagan. Period.
    Quite true. But in 1980, for example, a huge portion of the Republican Party weren’t all that big enthusiasts for Reagan either. In fact, for all that he was Reagan’s VP, I seem to recall that the elder George Bush wasn’t much in the mold of Ronald Reagan.

  548. That’s really not true. Obama was not Ronald Reagan. Period.
    Quite true. But in 1980, for example, a huge portion of the Republican Party weren’t all that big enthusiasts for Reagan either. In fact, for all that he was Reagan’s VP, I seem to recall that the elder George Bush wasn’t much in the mold of Ronald Reagan.

  549. There is no, none, nada, group of ‘sane’ Republicans who would have initiated and passed the most earth shaking safety net program in over 50 years.
    Or created the EPA or OSHA either. Oh wait, that was a Republican, wasn’t it. Then, certainly, not now. But it’s counterproductive to insist that Republicans are irredeemably horrid and always (or at least since 1900) have been. Which we have heard rather a lot of lately.
    I’ve got no brief for either the Trumpistas or the KnowNothings. But I can remember when such people were considered beyond the pale. A fact which informs my hope that they can return to that position. (And good riddance.)

  550. There is no, none, nada, group of ‘sane’ Republicans who would have initiated and passed the most earth shaking safety net program in over 50 years.
    Or created the EPA or OSHA either. Oh wait, that was a Republican, wasn’t it. Then, certainly, not now. But it’s counterproductive to insist that Republicans are irredeemably horrid and always (or at least since 1900) have been. Which we have heard rather a lot of lately.
    I’ve got no brief for either the Trumpistas or the KnowNothings. But I can remember when such people were considered beyond the pale. A fact which informs my hope that they can return to that position. (And good riddance.)

  551. Or created the EPA or OSHA either. Oh wait, that was a Republican
    Wrong. Nixon signed those because the Dems had overwhelming majorities in Congress, not because he thought they were beneficial public policy. It wasn’t the GOP that introduced those bills.
    He was basically playing defense.

  552. Or created the EPA or OSHA either. Oh wait, that was a Republican
    Wrong. Nixon signed those because the Dems had overwhelming majorities in Congress, not because he thought they were beneficial public policy. It wasn’t the GOP that introduced those bills.
    He was basically playing defense.

  553. But it’s counterproductive to insist that Republicans are irredeemably horrid and always (or at least since 1900) have been.
    Asserts facts not in evidence. It may be counterproductive to you, but your are an admittedly tiny minority clinging with baffling allegiance to a rancid political organization run by a bunch of lunatics.
    You would have a lot more ideological comfort and possibly influence as center or even right Democrat.

  554. But it’s counterproductive to insist that Republicans are irredeemably horrid and always (or at least since 1900) have been.
    Asserts facts not in evidence. It may be counterproductive to you, but your are an admittedly tiny minority clinging with baffling allegiance to a rancid political organization run by a bunch of lunatics.
    You would have a lot more ideological comfort and possibly influence as center or even right Democrat.

  555. I seem to recall that the elder George Bush wasn’t much in the mold of Ronald Reagan.
    elder Bush could be as reactionary as the rest of them.
    Reagan nearly unseated Ford in 1976 and swept through the primaries in 1980 (cite).
    Claiming he was not viewed favorably by a large part of the party is simply not in line with the facts.

  556. I seem to recall that the elder George Bush wasn’t much in the mold of Ronald Reagan.
    elder Bush could be as reactionary as the rest of them.
    Reagan nearly unseated Ford in 1976 and swept through the primaries in 1980 (cite).
    Claiming he was not viewed favorably by a large part of the party is simply not in line with the facts.

  557. So Bobby, are you arguing that there is no need for more than one viable party of government? Or are you of the opinion that there is a realistic possibility of a third party somehow rising to replace the Republicans? (And if the latter, where do you see signs of it?)

  558. So Bobby, are you arguing that there is no need for more than one viable party of government? Or are you of the opinion that there is a realistic possibility of a third party somehow rising to replace the Republicans? (And if the latter, where do you see signs of it?)

  559. If a viable third party would rise, it would imo be to the left of the Dems who in turn would either move to the position of the old center right party or split, one part becoming the new center right party and the other merging with the new center left one.
    But I consider the chances to be rather low that there will be such a peaceful shift to ‘normal’. If the RW loonies face the abyss, they are more likely to finally drop the last pretense of democracy and try to hold on to power by all means. The question then will be, whether they will rely on government means alone or unleash ‘the base’ (look out for ads like the new NRA one) in the (imo vain) hope that they then can control it and put the leash on back again when the dirty work is done.
    Fortunately, I do not think Trump is the one who could pull it off (a good Mussolini impersonator but lacking the political skills that the duce displayed at least in his early years).
    Dubya was Wilhelm II without the intellectual curiosity, Trump is Benito M. without skills beyond the stump/tribune. What will be next?

  560. If a viable third party would rise, it would imo be to the left of the Dems who in turn would either move to the position of the old center right party or split, one part becoming the new center right party and the other merging with the new center left one.
    But I consider the chances to be rather low that there will be such a peaceful shift to ‘normal’. If the RW loonies face the abyss, they are more likely to finally drop the last pretense of democracy and try to hold on to power by all means. The question then will be, whether they will rely on government means alone or unleash ‘the base’ (look out for ads like the new NRA one) in the (imo vain) hope that they then can control it and put the leash on back again when the dirty work is done.
    Fortunately, I do not think Trump is the one who could pull it off (a good Mussolini impersonator but lacking the political skills that the duce displayed at least in his early years).
    Dubya was Wilhelm II without the intellectual curiosity, Trump is Benito M. without skills beyond the stump/tribune. What will be next?

  561. What will be next?
    This is the fearful question I ask myself. Although I see no immediate signs of the “RW loonies” facing the abyss, as Hartmut puts it, despite wj’s thoroughly decent-minded prescriptions of how to pull the Rs back from the brink of the madness they’ve dragged themselves to. I desperately hope that the midterms and their aftermath prove me wrong.

  562. What will be next?
    This is the fearful question I ask myself. Although I see no immediate signs of the “RW loonies” facing the abyss, as Hartmut puts it, despite wj’s thoroughly decent-minded prescriptions of how to pull the Rs back from the brink of the madness they’ve dragged themselves to. I desperately hope that the midterms and their aftermath prove me wrong.

  563. “What will be next?”
    I think we’ve seen “What’s next”, Macron is as troublesome as Obama, the definitively not R nor middle of the road but clearly authoritarian, is.
    The most likely downfall of America is a bunch of people willingly handing absolute control to a dictator who can hide for a while behind a”mandate”. And Trump isn’t it, he is the pendulum swing.
    The next Obama will likely destroy our country.
    As for Medicare, I’m for it. Have been. But if you really want to keep pissing off the middle class keep comparing something they have paid for out of their paycheck, identified, specific, taxes sold as old age health insurance to single payer. Same goes for calling SS an “entitlement”.
    And, despite the challenges, both D and R leaders have talked about “entitlement” reform for decades. The clearest answer to that charade is the reaction to the current healthcare bill.
    In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it. Block grants? No way that would slow growth in expenditures. But wait, isn’t that what entitlement reform is? Your just a murderer trying to cut taxes. But wait, isn’t that the desired result of entitlement reform?
    Week, no it’s not. Entitlement reform on the left is removing all the last of the illusion that these programs are not designed to create a permanent underclass in order to have a sufficient number of voters who rely completely on the government to ensure a permanent majority for the “intellectual” elite direct.
    The reaction post election to Trump was that they thought with Hilary they could consolidate the progress toward that and simply thought they were almost there. The pain of realizing there was still a substantial number of people willing to vote for ANYTHING but them was a major insult, thin skinned and self righteous as they are, despite the fact that in the larger scheme of things it is a minor detour on the way to a socialist, read Mussolini style, dictatorship.
    There is a reason (besides his incompetence in general) Trump can’t consolidate his power. He doesn’t believe in strong centralized government although I doubt he could articulate that.

  564. “What will be next?”
    I think we’ve seen “What’s next”, Macron is as troublesome as Obama, the definitively not R nor middle of the road but clearly authoritarian, is.
    The most likely downfall of America is a bunch of people willingly handing absolute control to a dictator who can hide for a while behind a”mandate”. And Trump isn’t it, he is the pendulum swing.
    The next Obama will likely destroy our country.
    As for Medicare, I’m for it. Have been. But if you really want to keep pissing off the middle class keep comparing something they have paid for out of their paycheck, identified, specific, taxes sold as old age health insurance to single payer. Same goes for calling SS an “entitlement”.
    And, despite the challenges, both D and R leaders have talked about “entitlement” reform for decades. The clearest answer to that charade is the reaction to the current healthcare bill.
    In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it. Block grants? No way that would slow growth in expenditures. But wait, isn’t that what entitlement reform is? Your just a murderer trying to cut taxes. But wait, isn’t that the desired result of entitlement reform?
    Week, no it’s not. Entitlement reform on the left is removing all the last of the illusion that these programs are not designed to create a permanent underclass in order to have a sufficient number of voters who rely completely on the government to ensure a permanent majority for the “intellectual” elite direct.
    The reaction post election to Trump was that they thought with Hilary they could consolidate the progress toward that and simply thought they were almost there. The pain of realizing there was still a substantial number of people willing to vote for ANYTHING but them was a major insult, thin skinned and self righteous as they are, despite the fact that in the larger scheme of things it is a minor detour on the way to a socialist, read Mussolini style, dictatorship.
    There is a reason (besides his incompetence in general) Trump can’t consolidate his power. He doesn’t believe in strong centralized government although I doubt he could articulate that.

  565. there’s a lot in your comment that is, I think, profoundly wrong-headed. i have no time right now so i’ll just reply to this:
    In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it
    there are ways to address the issue of health care availability that don’t requre throwing money at it. most of them aren’t acceptable because they involve constraining some folks’ ability to make money hand over fist.
    allowing the feds to negotiate pharma prices, frex.
    we don’t like those solutions. why?
    so, instead the answer is to cut funds for programs that help poor and poor-ish people.
    FUBAR

  566. there’s a lot in your comment that is, I think, profoundly wrong-headed. i have no time right now so i’ll just reply to this:
    In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it
    there are ways to address the issue of health care availability that don’t requre throwing money at it. most of them aren’t acceptable because they involve constraining some folks’ ability to make money hand over fist.
    allowing the feds to negotiate pharma prices, frex.
    we don’t like those solutions. why?
    so, instead the answer is to cut funds for programs that help poor and poor-ish people.
    FUBAR

  567. I think we’ve seen “What’s next”, Macron is as troublesome as Obama,
    Hélas, Marty, notre conseiller sans parti pris ni préjugé et dans le respect pour tous les points de vue! N’importe quoi…

  568. I think we’ve seen “What’s next”, Macron is as troublesome as Obama,
    Hélas, Marty, notre conseiller sans parti pris ni préjugé et dans le respect pour tous les points de vue! N’importe quoi…

  569. …are you arguing that there is no need for more than one viable party of government?
    christ almighty…ok, i admit it, I stopped beating my wife some time ago. There. Are you happy now?

  570. …are you arguing that there is no need for more than one viable party of government?
    christ almighty…ok, i admit it, I stopped beating my wife some time ago. There. Are you happy now?

  571. Entitlement reform on the left is removing all the last of the illusion that these programs are not(??? -ed.) designed to create a permanent underclass in order to have a sufficient number of voters who rely completely on the government to ensure a permanent majority for the “intellectual” elite direct.
    Yes. Libruls are the real fascists.
    The secret is out.

  572. Entitlement reform on the left is removing all the last of the illusion that these programs are not(??? -ed.) designed to create a permanent underclass in order to have a sufficient number of voters who rely completely on the government to ensure a permanent majority for the “intellectual” elite direct.
    Yes. Libruls are the real fascists.
    The secret is out.

  575. The next Obama will likely destroy our country.
    the GOP will never be reformed until it’s no longer in the grip of such colorful delusions.

  576. The next Obama will likely destroy our country.
    the GOP will never be reformed until it’s no longer in the grip of such colorful delusions.

  583. I just re-read Marty’s 7:10 a couple of times, in the hope of trying to make sense of it.
    It just seems like a delusional paranoid rant. To me.
    Obama as a stepping stone to a Mussolini style dictatorship? A pernicious left wing agenda to create a permanent underclass that will vote (D)?
    My first response is don’t take the brown acid.
    My next response is to say don’t tell me what the middle class will or will not tolerate, I’m middle class and you by god don’t speak for me.
    My next response is WTF is wrong with you.
    None of these are particularly charitable reactions.
    Basically, as far as basic, fundamental social and political values, we do not live on the same planet. We do not. Your opinions seem like the rantings of a paranoid loony to me. I’m sure mine seem the same way to you.
    I’m not sure what there is to talk about. I don’t know how to get to common ground with somebody who thinks Obama is a crypto Mussolini. I can’t find a basis for discussion.
    It’s one thing to try to talk about possible ways to lower health care costs. Shut off the free money? Move away from fee for service?
    These are feasible conversations.
    Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    Well, fnck you too, buddy.
    Really, this is no longer one nation, we’re just trying to pretend. I see no other way to look at it.

  584. I just re-read Marty’s 7:10 a couple of times, in the hope of trying to make sense of it.
    It just seems like a delusional paranoid rant. To me.
    Obama as a stepping stone to a Mussolini style dictatorship? A pernicious left wing agenda to create a permanent underclass that will vote (D)?
    My first response is don’t take the brown acid.
    My next response is to say don’t tell me what the middle class will or will not tolerate, I’m middle class and you by god don’t speak for me.
    My next response is WTF is wrong with you.
    None of these are particularly charitable reactions.
    Basically, as far as basic, fundamental social and political values, we do not live on the same planet. We do not. Your opinions seem like the rantings of a paranoid loony to me. I’m sure mine seem the same way to you.
    I’m not sure what there is to talk about. I don’t know how to get to common ground with somebody who thinks Obama is a crypto Mussolini. I can’t find a basis for discussion.
    It’s one thing to try to talk about possible ways to lower health care costs. Shut off the free money? Move away from fee for service?
    These are feasible conversations.
    Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    Well, fnck you too, buddy.
    Really, this is no longer one nation, we’re just trying to pretend. I see no other way to look at it.

  587. “In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it.”
    Thus also the nutty Citizens United, blockbuster action movie sequels, Mercedes dealerships, my plumber, major league baseball team owners who require a closer, my landlord (except the problem is never identified specifically, but I have a feeling I know what it is), and boutique valet medical services, I spose.
    Welcome to America, kid, where a rip-off $24 downpayment in beads on Manhattan was turned into Trump Tower and the contractors can’t get paid
    Here’s a plan to spend peanuts:
    http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/07/medical-care-bargain-hunting-bret-stephens
    If spending more was not baked into the American cake, those who use crowdfunding sites to pay for their kids’ tumor surgery would disperse the crowds with dogs and fire hoses after accepting the first nickel, to incentivize their own thriftiness in our bizarro-world Monte Hall medical setup where the offer is “whatever you do, do NOT come on down!”
    And, inevitably:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKMK3XGO27k

  588. “In a nutshell, we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it.”
    Thus also the nutty Citizens United, blockbuster action movie sequels, Mercedes dealerships, my plumber, major league baseball team owners who require a closer, my landlord (except the problem is never identified specifically, but I have a feeling I know what it is), and boutique valet medical services, I spose.
    Welcome to America, kid, where a rip-off $24 downpayment in beads on Manhattan was turned into Trump Tower and the contractors can’t get paid
    Here’s a plan to spend peanuts:
    http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/07/medical-care-bargain-hunting-bret-stephens
    If spending more was not baked into the American cake, those who use crowdfunding sites to pay for their kids’ tumor surgery would disperse the crowds with dogs and fire hoses after accepting the first nickel, to incentivize their own thriftiness in our bizarro-world Monte Hall medical setup where the offer is “whatever you do, do NOT come on down!”
    And, inevitably:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKMK3XGO27k

  589. marty says the next obama will destroy the nation.
    i say no need for that, knee-jerk free market fundamentalism and reagan’s nine scariest words are already getting the job done.
    place your bets.

  590. marty says the next obama will destroy the nation.
    i say no need for that, knee-jerk free market fundamentalism and reagan’s nine scariest words are already getting the job done.
    place your bets.

  593. christ almighty…ok, i admit it, I stopped beating my wife some time ago. There. Are you happy now?
    Bobby, I tried, really I did, to offer alternatives. If I had a failure of imagination (wouldn’t be the first time), feel free to explain what you see as the path forward. Because beyond
    – reform the Republican Party
    – start a new (probably center-right, although Hartmut may be right) party
    – go with just a single party
    I just can’t come up with anything.

  594. christ almighty…ok, i admit it, I stopped beating my wife some time ago. There. Are you happy now?
    Bobby, I tried, really I did, to offer alternatives. If I had a failure of imagination (wouldn’t be the first time), feel free to explain what you see as the path forward. Because beyond
    – reform the Republican Party
    – start a new (probably center-right, although Hartmut may be right) party
    – go with just a single party
    I just can’t come up with anything.

  595. From Russell’s link:

    At a re-election fundraiser on Wednesday, Trump said it would be “fun” to sue CNN

    And that is probably one of Trump’s most honest statements in months. Suing people (in order to intimidate them) really does seem to be his idea of fun.
    It would be SAD (deliberate referback) if it wasn’t so appalling — in anyone, much less a President.

  596. From Russell’s link:

    At a re-election fundraiser on Wednesday, Trump said it would be “fun” to sue CNN

    And that is probably one of Trump’s most honest statements in months. Suing people (in order to intimidate them) really does seem to be his idea of fun.
    It would be SAD (deliberate referback) if it wasn’t so appalling — in anyone, much less a President.

  597. we’ll always have two parties, in the US.
    if the GOP splits, one part will dominate and the other will fade or assimilate – that’s been the history of third parties for as long as the US has existed.
    Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    at least he didn’t go for the old “Democratic Plantation” line.

  598. we’ll always have two parties, in the US.
    if the GOP splits, one part will dominate and the other will fade or assimilate – that’s been the history of third parties for as long as the US has existed.
    Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    at least he didn’t go for the old “Democratic Plantation” line.

  599. Still an open thread, so I just want to excerpt a paragraph from a piece by John Le Carre in today’s Observer, taken from a speech he gave at an awards ceremony in Germany, in which he is talking (mainly) about why he has always loved the German language, and also about the importance of language, and precise language, in general. To all those who have sometimes tired of my lame attempts to explain why I think that it is so important to use terms correctly, and to discriminate properly in the language we ourselves use, I give you this topical quotation:

    Clear language – lucid, rational language – to a man at war with both truth and reason, is an existential threat. Clear language to such a man is a direct assault on his obfuscations, contradictions and lies. To him, it is the voice of the enemy. To him, it is fake news. Because he knows, if only intuitively, what we know to our cost: that without clear language there is no standard of truth.

  600. Still an open thread, so I just want to excerpt a paragraph from a piece by John Le Carre in today’s Observer, taken from a speech he gave at an awards ceremony in Germany, in which he is talking (mainly) about why he has always loved the German language, and also about the importance of language, and precise language, in general. To all those who have sometimes tired of my lame attempts to explain why I think that it is so important to use terms correctly, and to discriminate properly in the language we ourselves use, I give you this topical quotation:

    Clear language – lucid, rational language – to a man at war with both truth and reason, is an existential threat. Clear language to such a man is a direct assault on his obfuscations, contradictions and lies. To him, it is the voice of the enemy. To him, it is fake news. Because he knows, if only intuitively, what we know to our cost: that without clear language there is no standard of truth.

  603. at least he didn’t go for the old “Democratic Plantation” line.
    No need for that since we all know that the Dems all tend their own personal weed plantations and have no use for competition there. 😉

  604. at least he didn’t go for the old “Democratic Plantation” line.
    No need for that since we all know that the Dems all tend their own personal weed plantations and have no use for competition there. 😉

  605. So why the hell not let them come???
    Because, once they’re here, they’ll release their self-replicating battle bots to take over the country…

  606. So why the hell not let them come???
    Because, once they’re here, they’ll release their self-replicating battle bots to take over the country…

  607. Mention of clear language and German in GftNC’s 1:30 inspires something less serious but wonderful: something from Mark Twain (IIRC he was accepting an award, though it doesn’t say that at the link).
    My favorite bits:

    I would only some changes effect. I would only the language method – the luxurious, elaborate construction – compress, the eternal parenthesis suppress, do away with, annihilate; the introduction of more than thirteen subjects in one sentence forbid; the verb so far to the front pull that one it without a telescope disc over can.
    [snip]
    I might gladly the separable verb also a little bit reform. I might none do let what Schiller did: he has the whole history of the Thirty Years’ War between the two members of a separable verb in-pushed. That has even Germany itself aroused, and one has Schiller the permission refused the History of the Hundred Years’ War to compose – God be it thanked! After all these reforms established be will, will the German language the noblest and the prettiest on the world be.

  608. Mention of clear language and German in GftNC’s 1:30 inspires something less serious but wonderful: something from Mark Twain (IIRC he was accepting an award, though it doesn’t say that at the link).
    My favorite bits:

    I would only some changes effect. I would only the language method – the luxurious, elaborate construction – compress, the eternal parenthesis suppress, do away with, annihilate; the introduction of more than thirteen subjects in one sentence forbid; the verb so far to the front pull that one it without a telescope disc over can.
    [snip]
    I might gladly the separable verb also a little bit reform. I might none do let what Schiller did: he has the whole history of the Thirty Years’ War between the two members of a separable verb in-pushed. That has even Germany itself aroused, and one has Schiller the permission refused the History of the Hundred Years’ War to compose – God be it thanked! After all these reforms established be will, will the German language the noblest and the prettiest on the world be.

  609. Charles, I really wish I could say that your suggestions seems wildly improbable and unrealistic. Unfortunately….

  610. Charles, I really wish I could say that your suggestions seems wildly improbable and unrealistic. Unfortunately….

  615. “Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    Well, fnck you too, buddy. ”
    Well, it does suck to be included in a group that you identify yourself with whose national leadership is anything but what you want.
    I never speak for you russell, but you can point to lots of middle class polls that agree with what I said.
    It also sucks when someone imputes motives that don’t exist to the actions and policies of your party/ideology. So the permanent lower class isn’t a goal, just an consequence? It isn’t part of a grander plan to retain power, getting those poor people and minorities to vote for them while really providing little opportunity or progress?
    When I take the same leaps about liberal policy that get made about conservative policy every day it is delusional paranoid ranting. Yes that’s what I hear from your side every day.
    sometimes 30 or 40 rants a day.
    I had a lot more but really, throwing out Mussolini in the context of Trump is absurd. He is an incompetent asshat and he isn’t by temperament, ability or desire a dictator much less the next fascist leader.
    And the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern.

  616. “Liberals just want to create a dependent underclass so you can seize power forever?
    Well, fnck you too, buddy. ”
    Well, it does suck to be included in a group that you identify yourself with whose national leadership is anything but what you want.
    I never speak for you russell, but you can point to lots of middle class polls that agree with what I said.
    It also sucks when someone imputes motives that don’t exist to the actions and policies of your party/ideology. So the permanent lower class isn’t a goal, just an consequence? It isn’t part of a grander plan to retain power, getting those poor people and minorities to vote for them while really providing little opportunity or progress?
    When I take the same leaps about liberal policy that get made about conservative policy every day it is delusional paranoid ranting. Yes that’s what I hear from your side every day.
    sometimes 30 or 40 rants a day.
    I had a lot more but really, throwing out Mussolini in the context of Trump is absurd. He is an incompetent asshat and he isn’t by temperament, ability or desire a dictator much less the next fascist leader.
    And the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern.

  617. So the permanent lower class isn’t a goal, just an consequence?
    I’m not sure I see it as a necessary consequence. I can see where it might be a possible one. Then again, I can see where a decent safety net system (not saying that our current one meets that threshold) could actually improve the ability of the poor to move up.
    Decent nutrition in childhood improves brain development. Decent medical care (especially preventative care) also improves children’s ability to succeed. Training, re-training, apprenticeship programs, ditto.
    Want to say we don’t have those now? Sure, in many cases. But I don’t see liberals opposing them. Unwilling to waste time and effort pushing for them, perhaps. But not resisting if someone else puts the forward.

  618. So the permanent lower class isn’t a goal, just an consequence?
    I’m not sure I see it as a necessary consequence. I can see where it might be a possible one. Then again, I can see where a decent safety net system (not saying that our current one meets that threshold) could actually improve the ability of the poor to move up.
    Decent nutrition in childhood improves brain development. Decent medical care (especially preventative care) also improves children’s ability to succeed. Training, re-training, apprenticeship programs, ditto.
    Want to say we don’t have those now? Sure, in many cases. But I don’t see liberals opposing them. Unwilling to waste time and effort pushing for them, perhaps. But not resisting if someone else puts the forward.

  619. He is an incompetent asshat and he isn’t by temperament, ability or desire a dictator much less the next fascist leader.
    As I said, he is a good impersonator, not the real deal. But imo, if offered, he would take the position of dictator, provided the actual work would be done by someone else and he could limit himself to public grandstanding.
    As for the GOP leadership, they lack some key elements of classic fascism and have more in common with the guys who brought the real ones into power in the mistaken belief to be the puppeteers not the useful idiots.

  620. He is an incompetent asshat and he isn’t by temperament, ability or desire a dictator much less the next fascist leader.
    As I said, he is a good impersonator, not the real deal. But imo, if offered, he would take the position of dictator, provided the actual work would be done by someone else and he could limit himself to public grandstanding.
    As for the GOP leadership, they lack some key elements of classic fascism and have more in common with the guys who brought the real ones into power in the mistaken belief to be the puppeteers not the useful idiots.

  621. I had a lot more but really, throwing out Mussolini in the context of Trump is absurd.
    hey man, you brought up Mussolini, not me.
    want to avoid a permanent underclass? pay working people enough to live on, and then some.
    all the wealth the US economy generates? give more of it to the people who do the stuff that generates the wealth, and less of it to folks who don’t.
    and that problem will be solved. see? so freaking simple.
    you up for that? I am.
    cops,teachers, plumbers, carpenters, milling machine operators, office managers, truck drivers, building maintenance people, home health aides, retail staff.
    add whatever you like to the list.
    pay them.
    like magic, no more underclass.
    it’s not freaking medicaid that is creating poor people in this country.

  622. I had a lot more but really, throwing out Mussolini in the context of Trump is absurd.
    hey man, you brought up Mussolini, not me.
    want to avoid a permanent underclass? pay working people enough to live on, and then some.
    all the wealth the US economy generates? give more of it to the people who do the stuff that generates the wealth, and less of it to folks who don’t.
    and that problem will be solved. see? so freaking simple.
    you up for that? I am.
    cops,teachers, plumbers, carpenters, milling machine operators, office managers, truck drivers, building maintenance people, home health aides, retail staff.
    add whatever you like to the list.
    pay them.
    like magic, no more underclass.
    it’s not freaking medicaid that is creating poor people in this country.

  623. Unwilling to waste time and effort pushing for them, perhaps
    let’s look into this. let’s go find all of the people advocating for childhood nutrition, accessible healthcare, and job training and re-training programs.
    then let’s see where they line up on the american political spectrum.

  624. Unwilling to waste time and effort pushing for them, perhaps
    let’s look into this. let’s go find all of the people advocating for childhood nutrition, accessible healthcare, and job training and re-training programs.
    then let’s see where they line up on the american political spectrum.

  625. And the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern.
    i think i see the problem. see my bolds.

  626. And the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern.
    i think i see the problem. see my bolds.

  629. You think Republicans are massively incompetent, what about the Democrats? For all these years, Marty tells us, they’ve been running a masterplan to win elections by creating dependency on the federal government. And yet almost all the states which are big net payers vote Democrat, while almost all the states which are big net recipients vote Republican.
    Anyway, Marty has made an interesting claim. How many people in the USA are there who “rely completely on the government” for their income? I suppose he doesn’t mean the military, nor employees of companies dependent on it. Nor farmers dependent on agricultural subsidies. Nor families like the Bushes who relied on the government to bail out the S&Ls they’d run into the ground. I think he means poor people living almost entirely off state benefits. How many of those are there?

  630. You think Republicans are massively incompetent, what about the Democrats? For all these years, Marty tells us, they’ve been running a masterplan to win elections by creating dependency on the federal government. And yet almost all the states which are big net payers vote Democrat, while almost all the states which are big net recipients vote Republican.
    Anyway, Marty has made an interesting claim. How many people in the USA are there who “rely completely on the government” for their income? I suppose he doesn’t mean the military, nor employees of companies dependent on it. Nor farmers dependent on agricultural subsidies. Nor families like the Bushes who relied on the government to bail out the S&Ls they’d run into the ground. I think he means poor people living almost entirely off state benefits. How many of those are there?

  631. As with many things, incompetence comes with different levels. For instance, take a group which, while having a sufficient majority** in the legislature, manages to pass legislation creating programs — albeit programs which fail to achieve their (supposed) end. Compare that to a group which, also given a sufficient majority, is unable to pass legislation at all. Which is significantly more incompetent?
    ** “sufficient majority” meaning a large enough number of members belonging to the group that legislation can be passed, without reference to members outside the group. Whether that requires 50%+1 or 60% depends on the exact piece of legislation and which house. But either way….

  632. As with many things, incompetence comes with different levels. For instance, take a group which, while having a sufficient majority** in the legislature, manages to pass legislation creating programs — albeit programs which fail to achieve their (supposed) end. Compare that to a group which, also given a sufficient majority, is unable to pass legislation at all. Which is significantly more incompetent?
    ** “sufficient majority” meaning a large enough number of members belonging to the group that legislation can be passed, without reference to members outside the group. Whether that requires 50%+1 or 60% depends on the exact piece of legislation and which house. But either way….

  633. Uh, I didnt bring up Mussolini, my comment was really directed at Hartmuts Mussolini reference.

  634. Uh, I didnt bring up Mussolini, my comment was really directed at Hartmuts Mussolini reference.

  637. You know the GOP tried creating a vast underclass at one time. After some fitful starts, 1873, 1892, and 1903, and some other false starts along the way, they came up with a doozy in 1929.
    It didn’t turn out so well for them. Those people selling apples on street corners and standing in lines at the soup kitchens soon feasted on government spending, and went on to become the richest bunch of folks in the history of the planet.
    What do Republicans bring to the table? Not much. Balanced budget mania (except when they are in charge) and fearmongering about the federal debt.
    You should be aware that there has been only one time in US history when the entire federal debt was paid down to zero. Jackson did it. A terrible recession followed.
    So it would seem that the Democrats learned something from that lesson. The GOP figured it out during the civil war (greenbacks), but soon thereafter reverted to gold standard mania.
    The rest, as they say, is history.

  638. You know the GOP tried creating a vast underclass at one time. After some fitful starts, 1873, 1892, and 1903, and some other false starts along the way, they came up with a doozy in 1929.
    It didn’t turn out so well for them. Those people selling apples on street corners and standing in lines at the soup kitchens soon feasted on government spending, and went on to become the richest bunch of folks in the history of the planet.
    What do Republicans bring to the table? Not much. Balanced budget mania (except when they are in charge) and fearmongering about the federal debt.
    You should be aware that there has been only one time in US history when the entire federal debt was paid down to zero. Jackson did it. A terrible recession followed.
    So it would seem that the Democrats learned something from that lesson. The GOP figured it out during the civil war (greenbacks), but soon thereafter reverted to gold standard mania.
    The rest, as they say, is history.

  639. It also sucks when someone imputes motives that don’t exist to the actions and policies of your party/ideology.
    Sure does.
    My response would be something along these lines.

  640. It also sucks when someone imputes motives that don’t exist to the actions and policies of your party/ideology.
    Sure does.
    My response would be something along these lines.

  641. the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern
    oh those poor poor set-up Republicans.
    they only control every fncking branch of the Federal government and they still can’t do anything useful because… i dunno, Obama?

  642. the Republican leadership in the Congress is doing what they can to govern
    oh those poor poor set-up Republicans.
    they only control every fncking branch of the Federal government and they still can’t do anything useful because… i dunno, Obama?

  643. Of course, exactly Obama.
    After all, he spent 6 years forcing the Republicans in Congress to do nothing and learn nothing about governing (except how to pass repeal and not replace bils). He did this by . . . magic? Or maybe super-powers? Must have been something like that.

  644. Of course, exactly Obama.
    After all, he spent 6 years forcing the Republicans in Congress to do nothing and learn nothing about governing (except how to pass repeal and not replace bils). He did this by . . . magic? Or maybe super-powers? Must have been something like that.

  645. Funny, they are trying to govern because they don’t come close to the despicable clones they are made out to be. They disagree on real issues and solutions. Somehow they don’t all vote as a bloc.
    I find that good not bad.

  646. Funny, they are trying to govern because they don’t come close to the despicable clones they are made out to be. They disagree on real issues and solutions. Somehow they don’t all vote as a bloc.
    I find that good not bad.

  649. Not all voting as a block is indeed a good thing. Provided they are willing to work across party lines in order to get things done. Which does not, so far, appear to be the case.
    I expect that, before the year is out, there will be at least a little bit of this. Given the need to do things like increase the debt limit — which can’t be done with just Republican votes. But so far, party line votes appear to be the strong preference.

  650. Not all voting as a block is indeed a good thing. Provided they are willing to work across party lines in order to get things done. Which does not, so far, appear to be the case.
    I expect that, before the year is out, there will be at least a little bit of this. Given the need to do things like increase the debt limit — which can’t be done with just Republican votes. But so far, party line votes appear to be the strong preference.

  651. the need to do things like increase the debt limit
    my prediction is that the hard-@sses among the (R)’s will take it to the brink to try to wring something out of it, and the adults will somehow manage to kick the can another few monhs don the road with some kind of provisional authorization.
    ask me why I think this.
    i’m not trying to stick it to anybody, but I seriously think about a third of the nation has lost it’s mind. and they are dragging the rest of us down with them.
    it’s getting old.

  652. the need to do things like increase the debt limit
    my prediction is that the hard-@sses among the (R)’s will take it to the brink to try to wring something out of it, and the adults will somehow manage to kick the can another few monhs don the road with some kind of provisional authorization.
    ask me why I think this.
    i’m not trying to stick it to anybody, but I seriously think about a third of the nation has lost it’s mind. and they are dragging the rest of us down with them.
    it’s getting old.

  653. I think that the portion which has gone (or perhaps just is) batshit crazy is probably closer to 10%. Then there’s the folks who were and are hurting bad enough that they were willing to try something off the wall, to see if it would make the pain go away.
    My sense is that the latter are, slowly and grudgingly, coming to the conclusion that it’s not helping. That there may even be reason to think/fear that the attempt at an off the wall solution is going to make things worse.
    They aren’t quite there yet. But if the Obamacare repeal happens, especially without any “replace” at the same time, they’ll get real unhappy with a) Trump and b) the Republicans in Congress real fast.
    Those Republican members of Congress who aren’t totally lost to reality are figuring it out, too. That’s why McConnell was so intent on getting his AHCA passed last week — he had a good idea what the impact of a little time with their constituents was likely to be. Guess we’ll see if we were right.

  654. I think that the portion which has gone (or perhaps just is) batshit crazy is probably closer to 10%. Then there’s the folks who were and are hurting bad enough that they were willing to try something off the wall, to see if it would make the pain go away.
    My sense is that the latter are, slowly and grudgingly, coming to the conclusion that it’s not helping. That there may even be reason to think/fear that the attempt at an off the wall solution is going to make things worse.
    They aren’t quite there yet. But if the Obamacare repeal happens, especially without any “replace” at the same time, they’ll get real unhappy with a) Trump and b) the Republicans in Congress real fast.
    Those Republican members of Congress who aren’t totally lost to reality are figuring it out, too. That’s why McConnell was so intent on getting his AHCA passed last week — he had a good idea what the impact of a little time with their constituents was likely to be. Guess we’ll see if we were right.

  655. I’m disappointed that Marty hasn’t begun to tell us about Macron and how the French example tells us about Obama’s perfidy. Vas y! J’attends l’illumination!

  656. I’m disappointed that Marty hasn’t begun to tell us about Macron and how the French example tells us about Obama’s perfidy. Vas y! J’attends l’illumination!

  657. wj,
    Be honest: do you think McConnell really believes that “Obamacare is in a death spiral” and that the “AHCA” will improve health insurance in America? or do you think that he doesn’t give a crap about all that, but is merely trying his best to make sure a trillion dollars flows up the income ladder via tax cuts?
    I ask because, of the two of us, you’re the only one who would even consider voting for a Senator who would vote to elect McConnell as Majority Leader. What makes a Senator “Republican” is who he or she votes to elect Majority Leader, AFAICT. Not his or her place in the liberal-conservative spectrum, or the ideology-reality spectrum, or any other range of opinion. Functionally, if you vote for McConnell to lead the Senate, you’re a Republican. If you don’t, you can call yourself a “Republican” Senator, but actual Republican Senators won’t.
    –TP

  658. wj,
    Be honest: do you think McConnell really believes that “Obamacare is in a death spiral” and that the “AHCA” will improve health insurance in America? or do you think that he doesn’t give a crap about all that, but is merely trying his best to make sure a trillion dollars flows up the income ladder via tax cuts?
    I ask because, of the two of us, you’re the only one who would even consider voting for a Senator who would vote to elect McConnell as Majority Leader. What makes a Senator “Republican” is who he or she votes to elect Majority Leader, AFAICT. Not his or her place in the liberal-conservative spectrum, or the ideology-reality spectrum, or any other range of opinion. Functionally, if you vote for McConnell to lead the Senate, you’re a Republican. If you don’t, you can call yourself a “Republican” Senator, but actual Republican Senators won’t.
    –TP

  659. Tony, I’d definitely incline to “doesn’t give a crap”. Although I think at this point he is even more avid/desperate for a “win” than for the tax cut. Which may color what accommodations he will be willing to make in order to get something, anything, passed.

  660. Tony, I’d definitely incline to “doesn’t give a crap”. Although I think at this point he is even more avid/desperate for a “win” than for the tax cut. Which may color what accommodations he will be willing to make in order to get something, anything, passed.

  661. I would not put it beyond him to go for a surprise action calling a vote when a few Dems happen to be absent from the chamber and to close the vote the moment he has a quorum.
    Only as a last resort of course. But, if the situation becomes desperate (those who should not be named going through with their recent open threat to close the donation spigot), I doubt he would hesitate.
    Him being not completely insane the debt ceiling deal will have to come first though (bridges should be blown behind not in front of you).

  662. I would not put it beyond him to go for a surprise action calling a vote when a few Dems happen to be absent from the chamber and to close the vote the moment he has a quorum.
    Only as a last resort of course. But, if the situation becomes desperate (those who should not be named going through with their recent open threat to close the donation spigot), I doubt he would hesitate.
    Him being not completely insane the debt ceiling deal will have to come first though (bridges should be blown behind not in front of you).

  663. “but is merely trying his best to make sure a trillion dollars flows up the income ladder via tax cuts?”
    This is really the whole point. There are 535 (?) people in Congress and I believe not one of them is this cynical or corrupt. Yes, they all are beholden to some moneyed intereststs, all of them. But nothing that they are doing is simply to make rich people richer at the expense of everyone else.
    The Republicans get my vote because they are willing to take crap, up to a point of course, to try to make things better in a way that is likely to help everyone. Sustainably.
    The ACA was exactly the opposite of that, it was designed to help some people in a way that was not sustainable from the beginning. Not, I’m pretty sure, for any reason other than a bunch of Dems thought doing something was better than doing nothing. They were probably right.
    Mow the Republicans are trying to do something better, and will pass something because doing something will be better than doing

  664. “but is merely trying his best to make sure a trillion dollars flows up the income ladder via tax cuts?”
    This is really the whole point. There are 535 (?) people in Congress and I believe not one of them is this cynical or corrupt. Yes, they all are beholden to some moneyed intereststs, all of them. But nothing that they are doing is simply to make rich people richer at the expense of everyone else.
    The Republicans get my vote because they are willing to take crap, up to a point of course, to try to make things better in a way that is likely to help everyone. Sustainably.
    The ACA was exactly the opposite of that, it was designed to help some people in a way that was not sustainable from the beginning. Not, I’m pretty sure, for any reason other than a bunch of Dems thought doing something was better than doing nothing. They were probably right.
    Mow the Republicans are trying to do something better, and will pass something because doing something will be better than doing

  665. …we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it.
    We know how to provide universal healthcare for much less money than the US spends on non-universal healthcare, because every other advanced nation does it. What you need is a national health insurance scheme. I think something like Germany’s would suit you best – it’s not even single payer.
    If the Republicans were genuinely trying to make things better they would adopt this obvious policy. Shame on the Democrats for not getting there first.
    Of course, the insurance companies, generous donors that they are, wouldn’t like it, and they’d have to lose some staff. A bit like when the Germans invented the motor car and my great-grandfather’s carriage-building business collapsed.

  666. …we simply can’t imagine a world in which anyone could solve a problem except by spending more money on it.
    We know how to provide universal healthcare for much less money than the US spends on non-universal healthcare, because every other advanced nation does it. What you need is a national health insurance scheme. I think something like Germany’s would suit you best – it’s not even single payer.
    If the Republicans were genuinely trying to make things better they would adopt this obvious policy. Shame on the Democrats for not getting there first.
    Of course, the insurance companies, generous donors that they are, wouldn’t like it, and they’d have to lose some staff. A bit like when the Germans invented the motor car and my great-grandfather’s carriage-building business collapsed.

  667. Pro Bono, The only problem, well maybe not the only one, with that idea is it assumes that simply changing to a nationalized system will create price parity. I really think Germany could drive prices down even further and improve quality of care if only they would adopt the ACA.

  668. Pro Bono, The only problem, well maybe not the only one, with that idea is it assumes that simply changing to a nationalized system will create price parity. I really think Germany could drive prices down even further and improve quality of care if only they would adopt the ACA.

  669. The Republicans get my vote because they are willing to take crap, up to a point of course, to try to make things better in a way that is likely to help everyone. Sustainably.
    conversely, they don’t get mine, because the policies they advocate in the name of sustainably making things better for everyone have not made things better for everyone.

  670. The Republicans get my vote because they are willing to take crap, up to a point of course, to try to make things better in a way that is likely to help everyone. Sustainably.
    conversely, they don’t get mine, because the policies they advocate in the name of sustainably making things better for everyone have not made things better for everyone.

  671. But nothing that they are doing is simply to make rich people richer at the expense of everyone else.
    Sadly, that does not appear to be the case.

  672. But nothing that they are doing is simply to make rich people richer at the expense of everyone else.
    Sadly, that does not appear to be the case.

  673. Marty, yes, that assumption is false. But national health insurance is a step in the right direction.
    There are three things which stand out about US healthcare compared with other advanced nations:
    a) it’s massively more expensive
    b) it has a unique funding model
    c) it doesn’t provide universal coverage
    The proposition that you can fix (a) by going even further out on a limb on (b) is insane.

  674. Marty, yes, that assumption is false. But national health insurance is a step in the right direction.
    There are three things which stand out about US healthcare compared with other advanced nations:
    a) it’s massively more expensive
    b) it has a unique funding model
    c) it doesn’t provide universal coverage
    The proposition that you can fix (a) by going even further out on a limb on (b) is insane.

  675. But then again bobby, Germany has a unique funding model and a significant private insurance industry, IIRC. So there may be little relationship, causation at least, between 1 and 2.

  676. But then again bobby, Germany has a unique funding model and a significant private insurance industry, IIRC. So there may be little relationship, causation at least, between 1 and 2.

  679. russell: conversely, they don’t get mine, because the policies they advocate in the name of sustainably making things better for everyone have not made things better for everyone.
    And Republicans don’t get MY vote because their arguments are transparently silly. Well, “arguments” may be too generous a word. “Propaganda”, or “memes”, or “mantras” may be more accurate descriptions of the kind of piffle that Republicans have either swallowed or spewed since at least Saint Ronald’s day.
    Consider “sustainability”, or the lack thereof. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are not “sustainable” we hear from out-and-proud Republicans like Marty. Ensuring that the old, the sick, the poor live halfway-decent lives can only happen as a byproduct of economic growth, goes the GOP mantra. Because perpetual “growth” IS sustainable, you see.
    And don’t worry your pretty little head about “sustainable” energy to power this perpetual growth. Neither fossil carbon nor the Earth’s CO2 dumping capacity for CO2 will ever run out. Not before Supply-Side Jesus comes again, at any rate.
    I won’t reprise my rant about the GOP scam w.r.t. the SS Trust Fund here. I won’t mount my hobby horse w.r.t. to the GOP meme that “small businesses pay taxes at personal rates” one more time. There’s no point: attempting to make the GOP faithful understand some things is not “sustainable”.
    –TP

  680. russell: conversely, they don’t get mine, because the policies they advocate in the name of sustainably making things better for everyone have not made things better for everyone.
    And Republicans don’t get MY vote because their arguments are transparently silly. Well, “arguments” may be too generous a word. “Propaganda”, or “memes”, or “mantras” may be more accurate descriptions of the kind of piffle that Republicans have either swallowed or spewed since at least Saint Ronald’s day.
    Consider “sustainability”, or the lack thereof. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are not “sustainable” we hear from out-and-proud Republicans like Marty. Ensuring that the old, the sick, the poor live halfway-decent lives can only happen as a byproduct of economic growth, goes the GOP mantra. Because perpetual “growth” IS sustainable, you see.
    And don’t worry your pretty little head about “sustainable” energy to power this perpetual growth. Neither fossil carbon nor the Earth’s CO2 dumping capacity for CO2 will ever run out. Not before Supply-Side Jesus comes again, at any rate.
    I won’t reprise my rant about the GOP scam w.r.t. the SS Trust Fund here. I won’t mount my hobby horse w.r.t. to the GOP meme that “small businesses pay taxes at personal rates” one more time. There’s no point: attempting to make the GOP faithful understand some things is not “sustainable”.
    –TP

  687. I tried, really I did, to offer alternatives.
    You need to consider more alternatives. For example, we are nearing the end of a major political realignment as the confederate south migrates to the GOP.
    And you truly believe “reform” of that house of loons is possible?
    I disagree.
    When the Whigs disappeared it was because they were trying to straddle the fence over the great moral question of human slavery.
    The only thing I see on the horizon remotely similar is the impending doom of global warming.
    But I don’t see it playing out similarly.
    How about the GOP goes into nutty political irrelevance and the Dems take major control? Rest assured, they would find something to fight about that could conceivably lead to two new parties: Center-left and left.
    Wouldn’t be the end of the world if you ask me.

  688. I tried, really I did, to offer alternatives.
    You need to consider more alternatives. For example, we are nearing the end of a major political realignment as the confederate south migrates to the GOP.
    And you truly believe “reform” of that house of loons is possible?
    I disagree.
    When the Whigs disappeared it was because they were trying to straddle the fence over the great moral question of human slavery.
    The only thing I see on the horizon remotely similar is the impending doom of global warming.
    But I don’t see it playing out similarly.
    How about the GOP goes into nutty political irrelevance and the Dems take major control? Rest assured, they would find something to fight about that could conceivably lead to two new parties: Center-left and left.
    Wouldn’t be the end of the world if you ask me.

  689. Germany has a unique funding model and a significant private insurance industry, IIRC
    The important thing Germany has in common with every other country with a working healthcare system is a national health insurance scheme. The key point is that premiums in the public scheme are independent of an individual’s health status.
    The thing that’s different in Germany compared with most other countries is that it’s not single payer, which makes it a bit more expensive than most other countries, but I think more suited to US tastes.

  690. Germany has a unique funding model and a significant private insurance industry, IIRC
    The important thing Germany has in common with every other country with a working healthcare system is a national health insurance scheme. The key point is that premiums in the public scheme are independent of an individual’s health status.
    The thing that’s different in Germany compared with most other countries is that it’s not single payer, which makes it a bit more expensive than most other countries, but I think more suited to US tastes.

  695. How about the GOP goes into nutty political irrelevance and the Dems take major control? Rest assured, they would find something to fight about that could conceivably lead to two new parties: Center-left and left.
    OK, Bobby, that’s another alternative like I asked for. I’d even say that I could see it happening. Although I suspect, based on what I’ve been seeing in California, that the Democratic split would be left (or center left) and center right. Given the number of center-right politicians** who seem to be Democrats these days around here.
    ** Cf my state Senator. Who is a Democrat, and who won office initially on what was essentially a single issue platform: opposition to strikes by public employee unions. (We’d just had a transit strike.) So not exactly a poster boy for the center left.

  696. How about the GOP goes into nutty political irrelevance and the Dems take major control? Rest assured, they would find something to fight about that could conceivably lead to two new parties: Center-left and left.
    OK, Bobby, that’s another alternative like I asked for. I’d even say that I could see it happening. Although I suspect, based on what I’ve been seeing in California, that the Democratic split would be left (or center left) and center right. Given the number of center-right politicians** who seem to be Democrats these days around here.
    ** Cf my state Senator. Who is a Democrat, and who won office initially on what was essentially a single issue platform: opposition to strikes by public employee unions. (We’d just had a transit strike.) So not exactly a poster boy for the center left.

  697. As for the GOP going into nutty political irrelevance, I’d agree the climate change won’t be what sinks them.
    Instead, I think the likeliest route to their demise will be if they succeed in passing one (either one) of their health care “reform” bills into law. Contra Marty, it won’t make things better; quite the contrary.
    The GOP base will be among those hurt worst by the disaster. And when they are, all the culture wars in the world won’t keep them on board.

  698. As for the GOP going into nutty political irrelevance, I’d agree the climate change won’t be what sinks them.
    Instead, I think the likeliest route to their demise will be if they succeed in passing one (either one) of their health care “reform” bills into law. Contra Marty, it won’t make things better; quite the contrary.
    The GOP base will be among those hurt worst by the disaster. And when they are, all the culture wars in the world won’t keep them on board.

  699. You can’t sell the German model to people who believe that Otto von Bismarck (who came up with it) was a co-founder of the communist party. Ironically his idea served the dual purpose of luring the workers away from the socialists (he feared) and at the same time torpedoing an employer based system pushed by the (classic) liberal industry leaders (he loathed).
    It has its flaws but it works. But I think an important part is that we do not have a major party that sees it working as its main flaw. The guy promoting “socially responsible early departure from life” for those who cannot afford treatment did not actually get applause for his bold vision.

  700. You can’t sell the German model to people who believe that Otto von Bismarck (who came up with it) was a co-founder of the communist party. Ironically his idea served the dual purpose of luring the workers away from the socialists (he feared) and at the same time torpedoing an employer based system pushed by the (classic) liberal industry leaders (he loathed).
    It has its flaws but it works. But I think an important part is that we do not have a major party that sees it working as its main flaw. The guy promoting “socially responsible early departure from life” for those who cannot afford treatment did not actually get applause for his bold vision.

  701. Given the number of center-right politicians** who seem to be Democrats these days around here.
    That’s to be expected when the party is taken over by lunatics and drive it off the cliff. If we retain our democracy, political monopoly will not happen. Humans will always disagree over who gets what.
    Those ‘reasonable people’ who seek political power will become Democrats. Maybe not flaming New Dealers, but in order to have political influence, they will have to accommodate the left wing of the political spectrum, not the right.
    Progress!

  702. Given the number of center-right politicians** who seem to be Democrats these days around here.
    That’s to be expected when the party is taken over by lunatics and drive it off the cliff. If we retain our democracy, political monopoly will not happen. Humans will always disagree over who gets what.
    Those ‘reasonable people’ who seek political power will become Democrats. Maybe not flaming New Dealers, but in order to have political influence, they will have to accommodate the left wing of the political spectrum, not the right.
    Progress!

  703. Politicians, like most sensible people, have a tendency to “move where the jobs are.” The question in my mind is, how does the presence of an “open primary/top two” primary system interact with that incentive?
    Which is, I suppose, a matter of whether they think that voters will react to an increasingly toxic label. Or will actually pay attention to what a candidate’s policy positions are. I suspect that that, in turn, depends on the make-up of their district/state’s voter pool.

  704. Politicians, like most sensible people, have a tendency to “move where the jobs are.” The question in my mind is, how does the presence of an “open primary/top two” primary system interact with that incentive?
    Which is, I suppose, a matter of whether they think that voters will react to an increasingly toxic label. Or will actually pay attention to what a candidate’s policy positions are. I suspect that that, in turn, depends on the make-up of their district/state’s voter pool.

  705. Legislatures have to be organized somewhat more rigidly than blog comment sections. In particular, somebody has to set the agenda. That somebody is generally the Speaker in the House of Representatives and the Majority Leader in the Senate. The agenda-setter is generally elected on a party line vote. That’s the first (and arguably the only) requirement for membership in the party: you vote for your party’s leaders to be the agenda-setters. Your own “policy positions” are nice talking points, but that’s ALL they are unless they line up with the agenda-setter’s “policy positions”.
    To vote for a nice, polite Republican whose first vote in the legislature will be to elect a Mitch McConnell or a Paul Ryan as the agenda setter is quixotic at best.
    –TP

  706. Legislatures have to be organized somewhat more rigidly than blog comment sections. In particular, somebody has to set the agenda. That somebody is generally the Speaker in the House of Representatives and the Majority Leader in the Senate. The agenda-setter is generally elected on a party line vote. That’s the first (and arguably the only) requirement for membership in the party: you vote for your party’s leaders to be the agenda-setters. Your own “policy positions” are nice talking points, but that’s ALL they are unless they line up with the agenda-setter’s “policy positions”.
    To vote for a nice, polite Republican whose first vote in the legislature will be to elect a Mitch McConnell or a Paul Ryan as the agenda setter is quixotic at best.
    –TP

  707. To vote for a nice, polite Republican whose first vote in the legislature will be to elect a Mitch McConnell or a Paul Ryan as the agenda setter is quixotic at best.
    Elementary, my dear Watson. why wj does not appear to grasp this concept is baffling.
    You know, we both heard the bs back when that, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, they left me” became a common refrain.
    Apparently, this simply cannot (or worse, should not) happen to Republicans, because reasons.

  708. To vote for a nice, polite Republican whose first vote in the legislature will be to elect a Mitch McConnell or a Paul Ryan as the agenda setter is quixotic at best.
    Elementary, my dear Watson. why wj does not appear to grasp this concept is baffling.
    You know, we both heard the bs back when that, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, they left me” became a common refrain.
    Apparently, this simply cannot (or worse, should not) happen to Republicans, because reasons.

  709. Since this thread is going everywhere, I would tend to agree with this wrt immigration.
    Speak up, sensible republicans! your time is now!

  710. Since this thread is going everywhere, I would tend to agree with this wrt immigration.
    Speak up, sensible republicans! your time is now!

  711. Elementary, my dear Watson. why wj does not appear to grasp this concept is baffling.
    Perhaps because I see where this leads directly to a party (either party can fall prey to it, of course) which are increasingly far from center. If you want a party to become less extreme (and I think we can agree that a less extreme Republican Party would be a good thing), you can’t just refuse to vote for moderate potential legislators from that party.
    Why you all can’t grasp that concept is baffling. 😉

  712. Elementary, my dear Watson. why wj does not appear to grasp this concept is baffling.
    Perhaps because I see where this leads directly to a party (either party can fall prey to it, of course) which are increasingly far from center. If you want a party to become less extreme (and I think we can agree that a less extreme Republican Party would be a good thing), you can’t just refuse to vote for moderate potential legislators from that party.
    Why you all can’t grasp that concept is baffling. 😉

  713. wrt immigration:
    I read this:

    The problem with Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic party in 2016, Beinart argues, is that they were way too pro-immigrant. They celebrated diversity rather than assimilation. They didn’t treat immigration as a threat to working-class prosperity.

    and I just can’t see how the second sentence fits with the rest.
    I think both diversity and assimilation are good things. I also observe that, judging from American history (other countries’ experience may differ), assimilation is inevitable. Over and over and over — despite recurring panics that it might not happen, to the detriment of the nation. So the only problem with the raising the idea of assimilation is the suggestion (common on the anti-immigrant right) that it might not be happening routinely already.
    Also, I don’t see that recognizing the impact of immigration on working-class prosperity requires opposing immigration. It seems like a better approach is to address the issue of improving working class prosperity in itself. It’s not like the issue doesn’t exist independent of immigration, after all. So why not address it independently, and continue to get the benefits of immigration?

  714. wrt immigration:
    I read this:

    The problem with Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic party in 2016, Beinart argues, is that they were way too pro-immigrant. They celebrated diversity rather than assimilation. They didn’t treat immigration as a threat to working-class prosperity.

    and I just can’t see how the second sentence fits with the rest.
    I think both diversity and assimilation are good things. I also observe that, judging from American history (other countries’ experience may differ), assimilation is inevitable. Over and over and over — despite recurring panics that it might not happen, to the detriment of the nation. So the only problem with the raising the idea of assimilation is the suggestion (common on the anti-immigrant right) that it might not be happening routinely already.
    Also, I don’t see that recognizing the impact of immigration on working-class prosperity requires opposing immigration. It seems like a better approach is to address the issue of improving working class prosperity in itself. It’s not like the issue doesn’t exist independent of immigration, after all. So why not address it independently, and continue to get the benefits of immigration?

  715. I also observe that, judging from American history (other countries’ experience may differ), assimilation is inevitable.
    It’s my impression (perhaps wrong) that immigrant groups moving to America have assimilated better than those moving to many parts of Europe, including the UK, especially in the 20th century onwards. Of course you have the nutty ultra-orthodox jews in Williamsburg or wherever they are, who only speak Yiddish and live a far from American life (actually we have some of those too) but certainly the story has always been that most immigrants moving to America are anxious to Americanise, and pretty successful in doing so. We have plenty of areas in the UK (Mr GftNC and I live near one up here) where Pakistani or Bangladeshi communities live what seem to be almost entirely discrete, separate lives, and where many of the older women (i.e. past school age) never learn English (although of course their children do), and reject mainstream English attitudes (e.g. acceptance of homosexual equality). Of course, faith schools (the existence of which I deplore and would immediately ban if ROTU) don’t help: it’s easy never to question the tenets of your birth religion if all your teachers and schoolmates also subscribe to them. I would hope assimilation is inevitable, but have my doubts here. Is my view of how well it works in the US too influenced by spin?

  716. I also observe that, judging from American history (other countries’ experience may differ), assimilation is inevitable.
    It’s my impression (perhaps wrong) that immigrant groups moving to America have assimilated better than those moving to many parts of Europe, including the UK, especially in the 20th century onwards. Of course you have the nutty ultra-orthodox jews in Williamsburg or wherever they are, who only speak Yiddish and live a far from American life (actually we have some of those too) but certainly the story has always been that most immigrants moving to America are anxious to Americanise, and pretty successful in doing so. We have plenty of areas in the UK (Mr GftNC and I live near one up here) where Pakistani or Bangladeshi communities live what seem to be almost entirely discrete, separate lives, and where many of the older women (i.e. past school age) never learn English (although of course their children do), and reject mainstream English attitudes (e.g. acceptance of homosexual equality). Of course, faith schools (the existence of which I deplore and would immediately ban if ROTU) don’t help: it’s easy never to question the tenets of your birth religion if all your teachers and schoolmates also subscribe to them. I would hope assimilation is inevitable, but have my doubts here. Is my view of how well it works in the US too influenced by spin?

  717. GftNC — I don’t think there’s an easy answer to your question. Sometimes I think it’s totally amazing how well it works here (has worked, at least), other times I wonder if the fact that we’re a nation built of immigrants isn’t one of the roots of our difficulties as well as one of the factors in our prosperity (I hesitate to say “success” under current circumstances. I don’t suppose I really believe that being a “melting pot” is root of our troubles (slavery, in the other hand….), but I do think it plays a role in our peculiarities.
    I heard a snippet on the radio a few years ago (or maybe I read it online, but I guess I’d have bookmarked it if so) saying that someone did a big study of English language acquisition among native Spanish-speaking immigrants to southern California. Their conclusion was that the process was the same as it has always been: new immigrants (esp. if older) often barely learn English, next generation learns it, next generation after that is pretty much English-speaking (and assimilated?). T
    This is obviously a memory of a snippet heard several years ago, but it certainly fits with my family history. My dad’s parents were both brought from Italy to the US as children (definitely not infants, but not yet teenagers either) by their parents. I don’t know much about my great-g generation’s language acquisition, but I do know that my grandma, who grew up mostly in Brooklyn (no doubt in a mostly Italian/Catholic “ghetto”), spoke, read, and wrote perfectly decent English, slightly accented. My dad understood a bit of Italian but I never heard him speak it other than a word here and there. My generation knew nothing but a few Italian cusswords, and we were totally assumulated except that our grandma made better food than non-Italian grandmas did. 😉
    So your older women who never learn English — I think that’s totally typical. Religious schools? I don’t know…I was ten when JFK ran for president and a subset of xenophobic Americans thought he was going to let the pope run the country. To me that was nuts: “Catholic” was nothing special, much less scary. (I don’t know if I’d say the same today; I’m not 10 anymore.)
    This language acquisition thing also runs counter to the current xenophobia about Spanish-speaking immigrants, aka “illegals.” The people who did the study said that the impression you get in certain parts of the country (California, Florida, where my sister grumbles because once she had to vote on a Spanish ballot) that we’re being overrun with Hispanics is because the numbers are so high, and most definitely *not* because people are refusing to learn English or to assimilate.
    I’m going to put a slightly different angle on this topic in a separate comment….

  718. GftNC — I don’t think there’s an easy answer to your question. Sometimes I think it’s totally amazing how well it works here (has worked, at least), other times I wonder if the fact that we’re a nation built of immigrants isn’t one of the roots of our difficulties as well as one of the factors in our prosperity (I hesitate to say “success” under current circumstances. I don’t suppose I really believe that being a “melting pot” is root of our troubles (slavery, in the other hand….), but I do think it plays a role in our peculiarities.
    I heard a snippet on the radio a few years ago (or maybe I read it online, but I guess I’d have bookmarked it if so) saying that someone did a big study of English language acquisition among native Spanish-speaking immigrants to southern California. Their conclusion was that the process was the same as it has always been: new immigrants (esp. if older) often barely learn English, next generation learns it, next generation after that is pretty much English-speaking (and assimilated?). T
    This is obviously a memory of a snippet heard several years ago, but it certainly fits with my family history. My dad’s parents were both brought from Italy to the US as children (definitely not infants, but not yet teenagers either) by their parents. I don’t know much about my great-g generation’s language acquisition, but I do know that my grandma, who grew up mostly in Brooklyn (no doubt in a mostly Italian/Catholic “ghetto”), spoke, read, and wrote perfectly decent English, slightly accented. My dad understood a bit of Italian but I never heard him speak it other than a word here and there. My generation knew nothing but a few Italian cusswords, and we were totally assumulated except that our grandma made better food than non-Italian grandmas did. 😉
    So your older women who never learn English — I think that’s totally typical. Religious schools? I don’t know…I was ten when JFK ran for president and a subset of xenophobic Americans thought he was going to let the pope run the country. To me that was nuts: “Catholic” was nothing special, much less scary. (I don’t know if I’d say the same today; I’m not 10 anymore.)
    This language acquisition thing also runs counter to the current xenophobia about Spanish-speaking immigrants, aka “illegals.” The people who did the study said that the impression you get in certain parts of the country (California, Florida, where my sister grumbles because once she had to vote on a Spanish ballot) that we’re being overrun with Hispanics is because the numbers are so high, and most definitely *not* because people are refusing to learn English or to assimilate.
    I’m going to put a slightly different angle on this topic in a separate comment….

  719. Nativists and white supremacists notwithstanding, I strongly believe that to the extent that our constant stream of immigrants “works” (people do “assimilate” — but they also of course have an effect on the thing to which they’re assimulating — “Italian” food was still considered sort of “foreign” in my home town when I was growing up 🙂
    …let me get the thread back. To the extent that it works, I think it works because we’re a nation of immigrants. (Yes, I know we took the place away from someone, but this ramble can only be so long.) I’m not surprised if lots of immigration both meets and creates quite different dynamics in places that have been relatively homogeneous and for a very long time.
    My son spent five of his first twelve post-high-school years in China. I spent a month with him there in 2010. The biggest thing on my mind for that month was China’s homogeneity vs. America’s diversity. I think it makes a massive difference in people’s mindset, attitudes toward the rest of the world, etc. And I say that even knowing that there are large pockets of the US that are and would prefer to remain mostly white etc. etc.
    Long enough….but a fascinating topic that is only going to get more central to our lives on this planet as global warming triggers ever more migration. (As if I know anything about it…but that’s what I think is going to continue to happen.)

  720. Nativists and white supremacists notwithstanding, I strongly believe that to the extent that our constant stream of immigrants “works” (people do “assimilate” — but they also of course have an effect on the thing to which they’re assimulating — “Italian” food was still considered sort of “foreign” in my home town when I was growing up 🙂
    …let me get the thread back. To the extent that it works, I think it works because we’re a nation of immigrants. (Yes, I know we took the place away from someone, but this ramble can only be so long.) I’m not surprised if lots of immigration both meets and creates quite different dynamics in places that have been relatively homogeneous and for a very long time.
    My son spent five of his first twelve post-high-school years in China. I spent a month with him there in 2010. The biggest thing on my mind for that month was China’s homogeneity vs. America’s diversity. I think it makes a massive difference in people’s mindset, attitudes toward the rest of the world, etc. And I say that even knowing that there are large pockets of the US that are and would prefer to remain mostly white etc. etc.
    Long enough….but a fascinating topic that is only going to get more central to our lives on this planet as global warming triggers ever more migration. (As if I know anything about it…but that’s what I think is going to continue to happen.)

  721. JHC, if I’d stopped to proofread I’d never have finished, but … oh well. I think all the typos are decipherable.

  722. JHC, if I’d stopped to proofread I’d never have finished, but … oh well. I think all the typos are decipherable.

  723. we were totally assumulated except that our grandma made better food than non-Italian grandmas did.
    Amen to this, all other assimilation issues aside. When I was visiting Israel once at Passover, and being subjected to the horrors of Ashkenazi jewish food (a jewish Frenchwoman I met told me about taking her father to have Friday night dinner with the English jewish family of her intended, and after a couple of courses her father turned to her and asked “Why are these people trying to kill us?”), I read in the food supplement of the Jerusalem Post about the typical dishes of the Italian jewish Passover table (roast goose, artichoke risotto etc) and marvelled at the culinary luck of the Italians generally.

  724. we were totally assumulated except that our grandma made better food than non-Italian grandmas did.
    Amen to this, all other assimilation issues aside. When I was visiting Israel once at Passover, and being subjected to the horrors of Ashkenazi jewish food (a jewish Frenchwoman I met told me about taking her father to have Friday night dinner with the English jewish family of her intended, and after a couple of courses her father turned to her and asked “Why are these people trying to kill us?”), I read in the food supplement of the Jerusalem Post about the typical dishes of the Italian jewish Passover table (roast goose, artichoke risotto etc) and marvelled at the culinary luck of the Italians generally.

  725. Well, the spin (as opposed to the reality) tends to be that assimilation doesn’t happen here. And that therefore we have (or will soon have) a problem. Early on (cf Ben Franklin) the worry was about the Germans. Then the Irish. Then the Italians. Then the Chinese and Japanese. Now the Hispanics.
    The reality, as opposed to the spin, is this: The first generation assimilates enough to interact with the people around them — if only so as to be able to do business. Their English can be problematic (although less so today than in earlier times, when English was less universally taught in the rest of the world). And while they don’t necessarily embrace some aspects of American culture, they don’t generally fight them either. No more than some of those whose families have been here for generations, anyway.
    The second generation, however, barely differs from the folks around them. They retain their parents’ language, mostly in order to talk to their parents; but English is really their native language. Culturally, they are pretty much generic Americans, like everybody else. They may keep their family religion (although often less strictly than the first generation). They probably retain the ability to cook their ancestral foods. And, depending on how intent their parents were on assimilation, their given names may be from the old country. But otherwise? Not much.
    And the third generation probably only speaks their grandparents’ native language if they studied it in school. They retain a few ancestral dishes. But otherwise, no noticeable differences. And lots of intermarriage with the folks around them, which smooths out the differences even more.
    All of that working does require something of the larger culture, of course. For openers, a willingness to do business with, and hire, the immigrants. Second, an ability to deal with the second generation like they were just another individual. (And even there, we have had failures over the years. See the Japanese American relocation camps during WW II. But see also the 442 Regimental Combat Team in the same war.) That is helped by the fact that, by this time, it can be really difficult to guess where someone’s ancestors were from. Even for them — which is why ancestral DNA companies have viable businesses.
    It is possible to retain bigger chunks of the ancestral culture. Uncommon, but possible. However, I would note that, for example, the (very) orthodox Jews that I know are in the IT industry — that is, not isolated from the modern world around them, however much of their culture they have kept.
    And again, no matter how much of the ancestral culture is retained, they all know the larger culture and how it works. It’s not quite complete assimilation. But it’s a lot more so than what I perceive to be the situation with the Pakistani or Bangladeshi communities in Britain, or with the Muslims living in the banlieues in France.

  726. Well, the spin (as opposed to the reality) tends to be that assimilation doesn’t happen here. And that therefore we have (or will soon have) a problem. Early on (cf Ben Franklin) the worry was about the Germans. Then the Irish. Then the Italians. Then the Chinese and Japanese. Now the Hispanics.
    The reality, as opposed to the spin, is this: The first generation assimilates enough to interact with the people around them — if only so as to be able to do business. Their English can be problematic (although less so today than in earlier times, when English was less universally taught in the rest of the world). And while they don’t necessarily embrace some aspects of American culture, they don’t generally fight them either. No more than some of those whose families have been here for generations, anyway.
    The second generation, however, barely differs from the folks around them. They retain their parents’ language, mostly in order to talk to their parents; but English is really their native language. Culturally, they are pretty much generic Americans, like everybody else. They may keep their family religion (although often less strictly than the first generation). They probably retain the ability to cook their ancestral foods. And, depending on how intent their parents were on assimilation, their given names may be from the old country. But otherwise? Not much.
    And the third generation probably only speaks their grandparents’ native language if they studied it in school. They retain a few ancestral dishes. But otherwise, no noticeable differences. And lots of intermarriage with the folks around them, which smooths out the differences even more.
    All of that working does require something of the larger culture, of course. For openers, a willingness to do business with, and hire, the immigrants. Second, an ability to deal with the second generation like they were just another individual. (And even there, we have had failures over the years. See the Japanese American relocation camps during WW II. But see also the 442 Regimental Combat Team in the same war.) That is helped by the fact that, by this time, it can be really difficult to guess where someone’s ancestors were from. Even for them — which is why ancestral DNA companies have viable businesses.
    It is possible to retain bigger chunks of the ancestral culture. Uncommon, but possible. However, I would note that, for example, the (very) orthodox Jews that I know are in the IT industry — that is, not isolated from the modern world around them, however much of their culture they have kept.
    And again, no matter how much of the ancestral culture is retained, they all know the larger culture and how it works. It’s not quite complete assimilation. But it’s a lot more so than what I perceive to be the situation with the Pakistani or Bangladeshi communities in Britain, or with the Muslims living in the banlieues in France.

  727. Funny you should mention Jewish food…long long ago I saw, in a magazine (remember those?) a light-hearted summery of the salient characteristics of different ethnic groups. (Probably wouldn’t be published today, too un-PC.) But one of the memorable ones was that Italians and Jews both express love via food. I have found that to be true, at least given my skimpy experience amongst Jewish families.

  728. Funny you should mention Jewish food…long long ago I saw, in a magazine (remember those?) a light-hearted summery of the salient characteristics of different ethnic groups. (Probably wouldn’t be published today, too un-PC.) But one of the memorable ones was that Italians and Jews both express love via food. I have found that to be true, at least given my skimpy experience amongst Jewish families.

  729. Yup, JanieM, I agree with that, but as I mention, to those unbiased by nostalgia I would say it is clear that the Italian recipients of such love are the lucky ones.

  730. Yup, JanieM, I agree with that, but as I mention, to those unbiased by nostalgia I would say it is clear that the Italian recipients of such love are the lucky ones.

  731. wj, that’s so interesting, the spin I have experienced (but possibly much longer ago than you are talking) was exactly opposite, and closer to the true situation as you describe it. Perhaps some group has the motivation to spin the current situation as one of non-assimilation (ahem)?
    And yes, wj, it was the banlieues in France I was thinking of when I mentioned Europe. Be safe with the fireworks by the way, if it is permissible to cross-thread.

  732. wj, that’s so interesting, the spin I have experienced (but possibly much longer ago than you are talking) was exactly opposite, and closer to the true situation as you describe it. Perhaps some group has the motivation to spin the current situation as one of non-assimilation (ahem)?
    And yes, wj, it was the banlieues in France I was thinking of when I mentioned Europe. Be safe with the fireworks by the way, if it is permissible to cross-thread.

  733. One other thing I meant to say. One huge change that I think may in turn change the way new groups assimilate in the US is the interconnectedness of the modern world. None of the immigrant generation of Italians that I knew (my grandparents and etc.) ever went back to Italy; they didn’t have the money, if for no other reason. Telephone calling was too expensive. Letters were the only way of keeping in touch, and some people did.
    Now — there are cell phones and there’s Skype and air travel isn’t really that expensive. Every time I get into a cab in Boston I have another conversation with someone who was born somewhere else but who still has family back in what my grandma called “the old country.” And the cab drivers do go back and visit, unlike in the old days. So a hypothesis is: in the old days, people assimilated in part because their ties to the old country were broken. Now, for many people, the ties aren’t and don’t need to be broken in the same way. (I know that’s not true of everyone who migrates, but it’s true for far more people than it used to be.)
    I feel like this is true even with names. A hundred years ago, Padraig and Pasquale became Patrick. Luigi became Louis. Giuseppina became Josephine. Etc. etc. I don’t think that happens as much anymore. But I don’t know what it portends.

  734. One other thing I meant to say. One huge change that I think may in turn change the way new groups assimilate in the US is the interconnectedness of the modern world. None of the immigrant generation of Italians that I knew (my grandparents and etc.) ever went back to Italy; they didn’t have the money, if for no other reason. Telephone calling was too expensive. Letters were the only way of keeping in touch, and some people did.
    Now — there are cell phones and there’s Skype and air travel isn’t really that expensive. Every time I get into a cab in Boston I have another conversation with someone who was born somewhere else but who still has family back in what my grandma called “the old country.” And the cab drivers do go back and visit, unlike in the old days. So a hypothesis is: in the old days, people assimilated in part because their ties to the old country were broken. Now, for many people, the ties aren’t and don’t need to be broken in the same way. (I know that’s not true of everyone who migrates, but it’s true for far more people than it used to be.)
    I feel like this is true even with names. A hundred years ago, Padraig and Pasquale became Patrick. Luigi became Louis. Giuseppina became Josephine. Etc. etc. I don’t think that happens as much anymore. But I don’t know what it portends.

  735. In 2015, the 55 million Latinos living and working in the U.S. were responsible for $2.13 trillion — or 11.8% — of America’s $18.04 trillion gross domestic product, according to a study released Thursday by the Latino Donors Collaborative, a nonpartisan association of Latino business, political and academic leaders.
    By 2020, the researchers estimate that Latinos will fuel nearly a quarter of all U.S. GDP growth, and represent 12.7% of the country’s total GDP. Helping to power that growth will be the growing number of young Latinos who will be joining the workforce as an older generation of American workers — the Baby Boomers — retire.

    Latinos key to U.S. economic growth, study finds: Latinos are becoming an increasingly critical engine for America’s economic growth, a new report finds.

  736. In 2015, the 55 million Latinos living and working in the U.S. were responsible for $2.13 trillion — or 11.8% — of America’s $18.04 trillion gross domestic product, according to a study released Thursday by the Latino Donors Collaborative, a nonpartisan association of Latino business, political and academic leaders.
    By 2020, the researchers estimate that Latinos will fuel nearly a quarter of all U.S. GDP growth, and represent 12.7% of the country’s total GDP. Helping to power that growth will be the growing number of young Latinos who will be joining the workforce as an older generation of American workers — the Baby Boomers — retire.

    Latinos key to U.S. economic growth, study finds: Latinos are becoming an increasingly critical engine for America’s economic growth, a new report finds.

  737. I think the the interconnectedness of the modern world works both ways. Yes, it’s easier to maintain ties to the old country. On the other hand, those arriving have already been exposed to American culture to an extent that previous immigrants were not.
    I think it also helps that there has been so much immigration already. The latest immigrants just do not, in most cases, make as visible an impact. And would make even less of one, were it not for a) laws mandating multilingual government documents, and b) businesses with no ties to the immigrant community still finding it good business to advertise in multiple languages.
    One example occurs to me of how much immigration we have already had. I was in a two-day meeting, a couple of weeks ago, of a Working Group of an international organization (ICANN). I was the only native speaker of English in the room. But everybody else spoke English, in addition to their native language and mostly one or two others besides.
    However, what really struck me, when I stopped to think about it, was the fact that it seemed to me pretty much like a project meeting in any large American corporation. The only noticeable difference was a lack of East Asian faces around the table.
    But otherwise, it could have been just another bunch of Americans, instead of folks from Sweden, Germany, Italy, Serbia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Senegal, Kiribati, etc. They looked like a bunch of Americans. They sounded like a bunch of Americans — most of them having spent several years living here, either as students or working. It just didn’t seem like I was half way around the world.

  738. I think the the interconnectedness of the modern world works both ways. Yes, it’s easier to maintain ties to the old country. On the other hand, those arriving have already been exposed to American culture to an extent that previous immigrants were not.
    I think it also helps that there has been so much immigration already. The latest immigrants just do not, in most cases, make as visible an impact. And would make even less of one, were it not for a) laws mandating multilingual government documents, and b) businesses with no ties to the immigrant community still finding it good business to advertise in multiple languages.
    One example occurs to me of how much immigration we have already had. I was in a two-day meeting, a couple of weeks ago, of a Working Group of an international organization (ICANN). I was the only native speaker of English in the room. But everybody else spoke English, in addition to their native language and mostly one or two others besides.
    However, what really struck me, when I stopped to think about it, was the fact that it seemed to me pretty much like a project meeting in any large American corporation. The only noticeable difference was a lack of East Asian faces around the table.
    But otherwise, it could have been just another bunch of Americans, instead of folks from Sweden, Germany, Italy, Serbia, Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Senegal, Kiribati, etc. They looked like a bunch of Americans. They sounded like a bunch of Americans — most of them having spent several years living here, either as students or working. It just didn’t seem like I was half way around the world.

  739. On July 4, Monticello will host its 55th annual Independence Day Celebration and Naturalization Ceremony. Seventy people from more than 30 countries – from Afghanistan to Vietnam – will become U.S. citizens during the Monticello mountaintop event.
    Postscript to an article about the excavation of Sally Hemings’ quarters at Monticello.
    A couple of years ago a middle school class at the school near by house wanted to go to a naturalization ceremony. These are held in Portland and Bangor, and not in venues large enough to fit a big audience. So the naturalization ceremony was brought to the school. I thought that was the coolest thing…..

  740. On July 4, Monticello will host its 55th annual Independence Day Celebration and Naturalization Ceremony. Seventy people from more than 30 countries – from Afghanistan to Vietnam – will become U.S. citizens during the Monticello mountaintop event.
    Postscript to an article about the excavation of Sally Hemings’ quarters at Monticello.
    A couple of years ago a middle school class at the school near by house wanted to go to a naturalization ceremony. These are held in Portland and Bangor, and not in venues large enough to fit a big audience. So the naturalization ceremony was brought to the school. I thought that was the coolest thing…..

  741. Now, for many people, the ties aren’t and don’t need to be broken in the same way.
    I think that it has always taken a couple of generations for people to assimilate, and (assuming our country remains true to its history, which is very much in doubt), that it will always be so. Even though people can keep in touch with family from the old country, they form new relationships, businesses, etc., in the US, and think of it as being home. Children have friends here. Grandchildren aren’t as close to their distant cousins, although maybe they see them sometimes.
    The biggest thing on my mind for that month was China’s homogeneity vs. America’s diversity.
    Most Chinese are Han, but there are many ethnic minorities in China, and lots of distinct languages (dialects?) that are incomprehensible to people who don’t speak them.
    Of course, faith schools (the existence of which I deplore and would immediately ban if ROTU) don’t help: it’s easy never to question the tenets of your birth religion if all your teachers and schoolmates also subscribe to them.
    Not sure why this is a problem, although I prefer secular schools too. It’s kind of interesting to have in one’s community people who grew up in the same town but have preserved customs and language that their parents insisted they learn. As an adult, I’m grateful (if sometimes mystified) for knowing people who have stories to tell about their eccentric upbringings.

  742. Now, for many people, the ties aren’t and don’t need to be broken in the same way.
    I think that it has always taken a couple of generations for people to assimilate, and (assuming our country remains true to its history, which is very much in doubt), that it will always be so. Even though people can keep in touch with family from the old country, they form new relationships, businesses, etc., in the US, and think of it as being home. Children have friends here. Grandchildren aren’t as close to their distant cousins, although maybe they see them sometimes.
    The biggest thing on my mind for that month was China’s homogeneity vs. America’s diversity.
    Most Chinese are Han, but there are many ethnic minorities in China, and lots of distinct languages (dialects?) that are incomprehensible to people who don’t speak them.
    Of course, faith schools (the existence of which I deplore and would immediately ban if ROTU) don’t help: it’s easy never to question the tenets of your birth religion if all your teachers and schoolmates also subscribe to them.
    Not sure why this is a problem, although I prefer secular schools too. It’s kind of interesting to have in one’s community people who grew up in the same town but have preserved customs and language that their parents insisted they learn. As an adult, I’m grateful (if sometimes mystified) for knowing people who have stories to tell about their eccentric upbringings.

  743. a lack of East Asian faces around the table.
    i work for a pretty large software company, in NC. some days when i need to clear my head, i take a stroll around the building i’m in (takes me 300 steps to go around the outer-most hallway of my floor). last time, i started reading names on office doors. probably 1/2 were either Chinese or Indian or SE-Asian of some kind.
    until recently, i had a South African manager. my typical meetings have nobody native to NC in them. many meetings i’m the only native-born American in the room. we have teams all over the world who Skype into meetings – my fav are the Scottish, because i always expect to be able to understand them but still have to concentrate harder on listening to what they’re saying than i do most of the Asian people! (there’s one Chinese woman that i just can’t understand)
    also, there are a lot of women. when i hear about the “bro” culture of Silicon Valley tech companies i just shrug – it’s definitely not like that at my company.

  744. a lack of East Asian faces around the table.
    i work for a pretty large software company, in NC. some days when i need to clear my head, i take a stroll around the building i’m in (takes me 300 steps to go around the outer-most hallway of my floor). last time, i started reading names on office doors. probably 1/2 were either Chinese or Indian or SE-Asian of some kind.
    until recently, i had a South African manager. my typical meetings have nobody native to NC in them. many meetings i’m the only native-born American in the room. we have teams all over the world who Skype into meetings – my fav are the Scottish, because i always expect to be able to understand them but still have to concentrate harder on listening to what they’re saying than i do most of the Asian people! (there’s one Chinese woman that i just can’t understand)
    also, there are a lot of women. when i hear about the “bro” culture of Silicon Valley tech companies i just shrug – it’s definitely not like that at my company.

  745. wj, I totally agree with your 4:47. I just can’t figure out your fealty to the Rs. Why don’t we all work together to make Dems dominate, then we can split into to rational parties (when either would serve the country’s interests, just maybe not to our particular liking to a T). I’m hoping for that with all my heart.

  746. wj, I totally agree with your 4:47. I just can’t figure out your fealty to the Rs. Why don’t we all work together to make Dems dominate, then we can split into to rational parties (when either would serve the country’s interests, just maybe not to our particular liking to a T). I’m hoping for that with all my heart.

  747. Sapient, I’m not sure my position actually amounts to “fealty.” I end up voting for way too many Democrats for that to be a good fit. (I am pretty sure that staunchly tribal Republicans would agree. (RINO is the nicest characterization they are likely to send my way.) And I would agree that the sooner Ryan and McConnell (or their successors) are demoted to Minority Leader, the better.
    But that said, I still think that the country will be better off if the Republican Party returns to sanity. I wouldn’t say that I’m super-optimistic that it will happen any time soon. (Although Trump’s ability to sow chaos in his wake may actually help.) But I think that it’s a more likely scenario than a new alternative party arising.

  748. Sapient, I’m not sure my position actually amounts to “fealty.” I end up voting for way too many Democrats for that to be a good fit. (I am pretty sure that staunchly tribal Republicans would agree. (RINO is the nicest characterization they are likely to send my way.) And I would agree that the sooner Ryan and McConnell (or their successors) are demoted to Minority Leader, the better.
    But that said, I still think that the country will be better off if the Republican Party returns to sanity. I wouldn’t say that I’m super-optimistic that it will happen any time soon. (Although Trump’s ability to sow chaos in his wake may actually help.) But I think that it’s a more likely scenario than a new alternative party arising.

  749. Although Trump’s ability to sow chaos in his wake may actually help.
    maybe.
    IMO, Trump is a stress-test on nearly every aspect of our politics.
    we’re failing, terribly.

  750. Although Trump’s ability to sow chaos in his wake may actually help.
    maybe.
    IMO, Trump is a stress-test on nearly every aspect of our politics.
    we’re failing, terribly.

  751. I was in the military during the Vietnam era. I even have a knife scar from a Vietnamese woman.
    But I was never in Vietnam and I got the scar in 2000 from scalpel wielded by a young doctor.
    Mome immigration the better. Even illegal immigration is better than none at all.

  752. I was in the military during the Vietnam era. I even have a knife scar from a Vietnamese woman.
    But I was never in Vietnam and I got the scar in 2000 from scalpel wielded by a young doctor.
    Mome immigration the better. Even illegal immigration is better than none at all.

  753. I think seeing Trump as a stress test is a useful idea.
    But while I would say that the Republican Party is failing the test (so far), I don’t think you can say that we, as a country, are failing it. We haven’t passed with flying colors, or he wouldn’t have won. But calling our performance an outright failure is, at the very least, premature.

  754. I think seeing Trump as a stress test is a useful idea.
    But while I would say that the Republican Party is failing the test (so far), I don’t think you can say that we, as a country, are failing it. We haven’t passed with flying colors, or he wouldn’t have won. But calling our performance an outright failure is, at the very least, premature.

  755. Charles, it’s interesting, is it not, that the only reason that big swaths of Trump supporters have a doctor available locally is . . . immigrants! American-born doctors just don’t seem to be willing to go there to set up shop. Must be a bunch of coastal elitists or something. 😉

  756. Charles, it’s interesting, is it not, that the only reason that big swaths of Trump supporters have a doctor available locally is . . . immigrants! American-born doctors just don’t seem to be willing to go there to set up shop. Must be a bunch of coastal elitists or something. 😉

  757. The situation in China is a bit different, since more than 90% of the Chinese population is Han. (I suspect that the non-Han tend to be concentrated in particular areas like Tibet and Xinjiang; I don’t know how much out-migration there’s been from those areas.)
    As for languages/dialects: the Chinese government is adamant that Cantonese, Shanghainese, and the rest are dialects, even though by most criteria they are distinct languages. Linguists temporize by using the word “topolect” instead.

  758. The situation in China is a bit different, since more than 90% of the Chinese population is Han. (I suspect that the non-Han tend to be concentrated in particular areas like Tibet and Xinjiang; I don’t know how much out-migration there’s been from those areas.)
    As for languages/dialects: the Chinese government is adamant that Cantonese, Shanghainese, and the rest are dialects, even though by most criteria they are distinct languages. Linguists temporize by using the word “topolect” instead.

  759. Tang poetry rhymes in Cantonese (I think it was) not Mandarin, an erudite young Chinese guy told me many years ago.
    I won’t have much time to comment til tomorrow night, because driving to the smoke (London – do you have that idiom for “the big city”?), so will explain my dislike and distrust of faith schools then (currently in bed and in no position for a proper post) if it’s still relevant. In the meantime, I wish you all a happy and fun Independence Day, with the hope (trust actually) that, regarding your current troubles as with everything else, this too shall pass.

  760. Tang poetry rhymes in Cantonese (I think it was) not Mandarin, an erudite young Chinese guy told me many years ago.
    I won’t have much time to comment til tomorrow night, because driving to the smoke (London – do you have that idiom for “the big city”?), so will explain my dislike and distrust of faith schools then (currently in bed and in no position for a proper post) if it’s still relevant. In the meantime, I wish you all a happy and fun Independence Day, with the hope (trust actually) that, regarding your current troubles as with everything else, this too shall pass.

  763. as a minor aside, the ultra-orthodox jewish communities in brooklyn (and dutchess county) are not to my knowledge immigrant communities to any significant or unusual degree.
    they are not an example of a failure to assimilate, they are an example of an intentionally separatist religious community. more like the amish, or some rastafarians, then like the un-assimilated muslim or other religious or ethnic minority communities in europe.
    a lot of them are the grandchildren and great-granchildren (and great-great- and so on) of immigrants who have converted to orthodoxy after an upbringing in more liberal or even secular jewish homes. the lubavitcher community in particular actively proselytizes among secular jews.
    more generally, the overwhelmingly typical experience of people coming to the US from distinctly other cultures is first generation settles around folks like themselves, second generation lives the origin culture at home but is american outside the home, third generation is unambiguously american.
    the other thing to note is that “assimilation” is a two-way street. immigrant cultures aren’t erased, they are absorbed and find new forms of expression here.
    which, to me, is of inestimable value.
    to the degree that this country actually has been able to remain resilient, resourceful, and vital, it is in no small part due to our openness to immigration and our talent for absorbing rather than isolating new arrivals.

  764. as a minor aside, the ultra-orthodox jewish communities in brooklyn (and dutchess county) are not to my knowledge immigrant communities to any significant or unusual degree.
    they are not an example of a failure to assimilate, they are an example of an intentionally separatist religious community. more like the amish, or some rastafarians, then like the un-assimilated muslim or other religious or ethnic minority communities in europe.
    a lot of them are the grandchildren and great-granchildren (and great-great- and so on) of immigrants who have converted to orthodoxy after an upbringing in more liberal or even secular jewish homes. the lubavitcher community in particular actively proselytizes among secular jews.
    more generally, the overwhelmingly typical experience of people coming to the US from distinctly other cultures is first generation settles around folks like themselves, second generation lives the origin culture at home but is american outside the home, third generation is unambiguously american.
    the other thing to note is that “assimilation” is a two-way street. immigrant cultures aren’t erased, they are absorbed and find new forms of expression here.
    which, to me, is of inestimable value.
    to the degree that this country actually has been able to remain resilient, resourceful, and vital, it is in no small part due to our openness to immigration and our talent for absorbing rather than isolating new arrivals.

  765. An interesting subcategory of immigrants are people who were adopted as babies by Americans or citizens of other western countries.
    In a documentary about Korean adoptees, some of them jokingly referred to themselves as bananas. Yellow on the outside, white on the inside. Some of them don’t seem to give their ethnic heritage much thought. Others feel conflicted. They are a part of their adopted culture except for their appearance. The only connection they have to their home countries is their appearance.
    Many adoptees have formed/joined associations. They make group trips to their countries of origin. And often try to find their biological relatives.

  766. An interesting subcategory of immigrants are people who were adopted as babies by Americans or citizens of other western countries.
    In a documentary about Korean adoptees, some of them jokingly referred to themselves as bananas. Yellow on the outside, white on the inside. Some of them don’t seem to give their ethnic heritage much thought. Others feel conflicted. They are a part of their adopted culture except for their appearance. The only connection they have to their home countries is their appearance.
    Many adoptees have formed/joined associations. They make group trips to their countries of origin. And often try to find their biological relatives.

  767. OK, so very briefly:
    In the UK, C of E and Catholic schools do have minorities of students of other faiths, but for example Muslim and Jewish schools have almost no students of other faiths. Religious schools are allowed, in their Religious Education classes, to teach (if they so decide, which Jewish and Muslim schools do) only their own faith. So, particularly in the case of Muslim and Jewish schools, children attend schools where they never encounter other children, or teachers, of other faiths. Accordingly, they usually grow up to mix only within their own communities. I think this ghettoisation is absolutely pernicious. People who grow up never encountering difference are easily indoctrinated with prejudice about other groups, and are much more insular and self- (or own-group-) centred. This produces the opposite of what I consider desirable, for people, citizens, communities or countries.

  768. OK, so very briefly:
    In the UK, C of E and Catholic schools do have minorities of students of other faiths, but for example Muslim and Jewish schools have almost no students of other faiths. Religious schools are allowed, in their Religious Education classes, to teach (if they so decide, which Jewish and Muslim schools do) only their own faith. So, particularly in the case of Muslim and Jewish schools, children attend schools where they never encounter other children, or teachers, of other faiths. Accordingly, they usually grow up to mix only within their own communities. I think this ghettoisation is absolutely pernicious. People who grow up never encountering difference are easily indoctrinated with prejudice about other groups, and are much more insular and self- (or own-group-) centred. This produces the opposite of what I consider desirable, for people, citizens, communities or countries.

  773. It is disheartening how many things get done in the name of “national security” which have no discernable relationship to security. Not just that they seem unlikely to improve security, but that they are simply unrelated to it.
    It’s enough to make a person think that the folks using that justification either know nothing about security or just don’t care about it particularly.

  774. It is disheartening how many things get done in the name of “national security” which have no discernable relationship to security. Not just that they seem unlikely to improve security, but that they are simply unrelated to it.
    It’s enough to make a person think that the folks using that justification either know nothing about security or just don’t care about it particularly.

  775. The trouble with assuming you know the answer to the (rhetorical?) question you are asking:
    http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/04/indiana-gop-asked-facebook-obamacare-horror-stories-responses-were-surprising/449586001/

    The Indiana Republican Party posed a question to Facebook on Monday: “What’s your Obamacare horror story? Let us know.”
    The responses were unexpected.
    “My sister finally has access to affordable quality care and treatment for her diabetes.”
    “My father’s small business was able to insure its employees for the first time ever. #thanksObama”
    “Love Obamacare!”
    “The only horror in the story is that Republicans might take it away.”

    Oops

  776. The trouble with assuming you know the answer to the (rhetorical?) question you are asking:
    http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2017/07/04/indiana-gop-asked-facebook-obamacare-horror-stories-responses-were-surprising/449586001/

    The Indiana Republican Party posed a question to Facebook on Monday: “What’s your Obamacare horror story? Let us know.”
    The responses were unexpected.
    “My sister finally has access to affordable quality care and treatment for her diabetes.”
    “My father’s small business was able to insure its employees for the first time ever. #thanksObama”
    “Love Obamacare!”
    “The only horror in the story is that Republicans might take it away.”

    Oops

Comments are closed.