Ten oz

I like this. Allow people to just buy into Medicare. How would we get around private insurance companies suing the govt claiming there were proce fixing for themselves and creating unfair competition? I like this. Allow people to just buy into Medicare. How would we get around private insurance companies suing the govt claiming there were proce fixing for themselves and creating unfair competition?

Trump says a lot of stuff. During the campaign he said universal coverage for all paid for by the govt. The reality is that he just says whatever feels good at the moments but ultimately doesn't write policy, doesn't know how govt operates, and doesn't actually care all that much what happens.

How do we pay for it? Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA cost us over a Trillion dollars a year now as is. Obvious the a single payer system would cost less overall but current the govt isn't paying the overall bill. The amount the govt would have to pay will go up. So rather than employers and individuals paying for private plans they will need to pay the govt. That is where it gets tricky because such a large percentage of the country is conditioned to think giving the govt money is a bad thing. It is crazy but people rather pay Kaiser $300 a month for a private plan than the give the govt $150 a month for the exact same care. To make universal Medicare work, viable as a political reality, people will need to accept giving more money to the govt than they currently do. What you are saying is the right answer but not viable in a country that elected Trump and beliefs background checks for buyers of military grade assualt rifles is a violation of their rights. The ACA was a baby step toward getting every covered and the right spent 7yrs demagoguing it to the tune of thousand of won elected seats across the country. What's palatable to the electorate simply has to be part of the conversation. "Keep Obamacare as is forever" isn't going to go over well as a position for Dems or Repubs in 2018. "Everyone pay more tax and we'll all have medicare" will go over better among many Dems but still is a cold served dish. More of a gazpacho than a universally loved American classic like chicken noodle soup. Remember, Bill Clinton pushed Universal Healthcare. Democrats had majorities in both houses of Congress and it failed. The healthcare push was blamed for Democrats losing the majorities that had in Congress to the "Republican Revolution "of 1994. In fairness Bill Clinton's proposal wasn't Medicare for all but the point is Democrats have lost many seats over the years in this issue.

Supernatural just means beyond scientific understanding. Lightning was once supernatural. It doesn't mean that something is beyond a process. If there is an all powerful god that entity still must do something to make life happen. Even if what a god does is manifest amino acid with its thoughts there is still something that happens. Still an assembling of atoms to molecules under specific conditions. The proof is undeniable because we are alive and are made of our biology. If we were made by god we had to have been of our biology by god. As for where god comes from I understand many believe god always was. And that is fine. However if god always was than that means there has always been life which means life was never created. Humans were made, life on earth was made, but life in general has always existed if we accept that god always existed. Which would mean there simple is no answer to the question. Attempting to answer the question however has been benefitial to society. Learning what we have about our biology and DNA has helped develop medicine, investigate crime, help families have children, and etc. So to answer your question regarding "what if science never discovers what made life" to journey has proven itself valuable. Nikola Tesla's quest for wireles engery transmission contributed to radio control and radar technologies. Much is achieved as byproduct of scientific research.

Run like a business really means run for the benefit of business.

Billions believe in various gods despite no one knowing. Plus as I pointed out God, if real, is living and as such doesn't explain how life can come from no life at all.

The overwhelming majority of people, basically everyone, is surrounded in their homes by things they cannot explain the creation of. Even the most educated amongst us cannot explain the process required for everthing in a home. For some it might be the exact temps required to turn Silica and ash into glass while others may not know the galvanizing process used to protect screws & nails. Yet none of us would argue the answer can't be known or that god must be responsible. Understanding that everything that exists has a process enabling existence is a basic concept we understand for seemingly everything. Personnally understanding the process for all things isn't needed 99.9% of the time. People don't understand have their laptops work yet no defaults to thinking it is magic. Why must the process that created life be different? When it comes to that question every layperson needs a universal answer than can be easily explained. Life exists and that fact in and of itself is overwhelming proof that life can be created. Even if we asssume god created it there still must be a process god used to do so. Meaning a process exists and is responsible. The inclusion of a god figure isn't neccessary. To our knowledge only we humans make stainless steel. Would another intelligent lifeform need to learn about humans and understand us for they themselves to learn how to make stainless steel? Whether or not that intelligence figured out how to make stainless steel has no baring on human existence. Learning how life can be created or where in the universe it have sprouted up exists separate from the concept of god. Btw, god is a lifeform. A lifeform seeding life on a planet is already within our ability. We could put life on Mars if we so chose. God as a lifeform making other lifeforms doesn't actually to get to the question of where all life comes from does it? For that question to be answered we would need to go all the way back to a point when zero lifeforms, inculding god(s), existed. Life from absolutely no life and not life from an already highly intelligent/powerful life.

While you are right look at the collateral damage surrounding the ACA (tea party moment, loss of over a thousan state seats by dems) meanwhile the ACA might be torn up and lit on fire. "Obamacare" became almost the singular issue used by the right to win seats, block legislation, and raise money. It was certainly the only real issue as the others were based on lies/exaggerations. Obviously people can be educated and what not but we must be honest about where we are. The environment that we exist in. Trump is POTUS, Ryan & McConnel rule the roost in Congress, and the GOP control the majority of state seats & Governships.

I like this idea. However since this has been so crazy and unprecedented I must insist that the bet applies to the players currently on the field. In something new happens like Ivana goes on Oprah and claims Putin and Donald ise to talk on the phone for hours or whatever than all bets are off. Since Flynn, Manafort, Stone, Sessions, Kushner, and the Dossier are all already involved whatever happens with them is covered by the bet. This depends on what Trump is guilty of. Did he just use Russian propaganda without realizing or caring about what is was because he found it helpful or did he and his team collude. If they colluded what is the quid pro qou: Did Putin just not like Hillary, Russia is making a long term tactical move, or did Trump promise something? In my opinion we already have all the evidence needed to show that Trump willfully accepted Russia's help and by doing so made their efforts more impactful. He was breifed by intelligence that Russia was responsible for the hacks and was interferring in the election yet he continue to cite the material, deny Russian involvement, and imply maybe it was China. To me that enough to impeach him. He promoted(by citing, celebrating, thanking) an attack on our election because it benefited him personally. He clearly is a compromised figure who is unfit to lead. Here is the ing though; didn't Pence benefit as well? Pence defended what Trump was doing because it benefited him to defend what Trump was doing. So even if the all Trump is guilty of here is willfully using Russian propaganda in an uncoordinated way aren't he and Pence both unfit? Obviously if they colluded both show be in prison. If only Trump colluded Pence should still be removed because he benefited and as such is compromised. That mean Paul Ryan would be POTUS. but again, even with Ryan, there was either willful use of or cullision with Russian propaganda. Ryan used material from hacks against Dems in house races. http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/gop-super-pac-linked-to-paul-ryan-used-illegally-hacked-material-against-democratic-house-candidates-report/ https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/13/us/politics/house-democrats-hacking-dccc.html So we have quite a dilemma here. It is legitimately possible that the President and basically the line of succession willfully helped Russia undermine our democratic process. So determining the best course of action is very difficult to decide. It seems clear that most people don't care that Trump used the material. They are aware he did, believe it was Russia, but accept that it is okay provided Trump didn't directly collude with Russia. I don't fully understand why people accept that but obviously they do. So it will take much more to impeach him and the more that there is the less and less fit for office Pence and Ryan become because they basically did the same and or provided cover. It is an unprecedented situation.

I would love, love, love, love, love it with we moved to a single payer system. One of the problems is that it isn't politically viable. We currently spend about a trillion dollars a year on Medicare and Medicaid. For over a decade our deficits have been around half a trillion dollars a year or greater. I know stupid tax cuts and wars are responsible for the deficits and that entitlement spending is different than discretionary spending but that doesn't change the political reality. People do not want to contribute "more" even if it means people will be contributing less. By that I mean a few would lose their tax credit and such while the majority will pay less. Sadly tens of millions take their cue from those who want the credits. Despite covering 20+ million citizens who otherwise would have coverage the ACA cost Democrats seat all over the country. Perhaps too many seats.

Perhaps you misunderstood. I was saying that we can't even get a special prosecuter, muchless an impeachment. This Congress won't act against their own. In itself this has already become a constitutional crisis.

How would we accomplish that? It is always a good pratice to incorperate what works form other systems but that is easy said than done when those other systems are single payer and we're not. Those systems very well might be too different for use to plug pieces from into our system. Truly I should say systems because there are several. We have millions on Medicare, millions of federal employers using Tricare, millions covered under the VA, millions on civilian employer brought coverage, millions paying for their own, and millions with none at all. Making it even hard to get a round turn on is the fact that all of it varies State to State. So what might help Texas greatly has the potential of accomplishing nothing in another State. Which is why I proposed focusing on trying to increase access to medical training. Try to increase the supply of those able to provide the service in hope that lowers costs and support innovation (educating more people typical does increase innovation). It obviously is not the be all end all solution but a step we can take without transforming the whole system top to bottom.

If we look back in history Special Prosecuters have been assigned to investigate far less. Under Carter for example a special Prosecuter was assigned to invetigate alligations that Hamilton Jordan (White House Chief of Staff) had used Cocaine once. http://time.com/3207118/studio-54-cocaine-carter-white-house/ The National Security Directory was fired for lying about Russia, The Attorney General was caught lying about Russia and has recused himself from cases regarding Russia and the White House. Iur national intelligence agencies (CIA, NSA, DIA, DHS, FBI, etc) all have participated in press releasing stating that Russia sought to influence the election to help Trump win. The directors of the NSA and FBI even went under oath before the Senate Intelligence Committe and stated such. Trump himself has lied about information he has briefed, Russian officials he has met, and refused to provide evidence of no finiancial ties to Russia. All that without even getting into Paul Manaforts and Roger Stone's connections to Russian Intelligence. More that enough evidence to assign a special prosecuter but Congress refuses to act.

In my opinion the current system needs improving. Care is expensive relative to what millions can afford and emergency care takes too long. The system can be improved. We don't need a scrap it and start over approach but it could be a lot better.

new and disturbing report in The Lancet, based on data collected from the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, shows an increase in the death rates from 1999 to 2014 for young Americans, driven substantially by a shocking increase in the mortality of white women aged 25 to 35. The average annual change in death rate by age and sex for men and women from 1999 to 2014. For instance, 25-year-old white women experienced an average increase in mortality of 3% every year for those 15 years, while 25-year-old white men had an average annual increase of 1.9%. Mortality rates also went up for white men and women aged approximately 40 to 50 and 62 to 64. All other ethnic groups, with the major exception of American Indians/Alaska Natives, experienced declines in mortality for all ages from 1999 to 2014. http://acsh.org/news/2017/02/01/death-rates-young-white-americans-increased-1999-2014-10812 This issue has been in the news lately do to recent studies. The following link is a discussion about possible reasons: http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/23/521083335/the-forces-driving-middle-aged-white-peoples-deaths-of-despair I lean towards expectations playing a role. Someone who expected a certian lifestyle or level of living who fails to obtain it feels worse about themselves than those who meet their own expectations even if those expectations are very low. For example I feel good about my life. I enjoy my job, love my wife, think the condo we own is very nice, etc. That said if someone like Donald Trump or Mitt Romney woke up tomorrow in my shoes they would probably throw themselves out a window. The expectations they grew up with are wildly different than those I grew up with. I never assumed I'd own a private jet, highrise building, or etc. For them it was always a minimum for gone conclusion they would. Of course that is an extreme example but on a smaller scale if life winds up tougher than one assumed it would be it has a greater impact on the psyche than if all goes as thought.

President Trump's backed healthcare plan was recently pulled. However Congress can revive debate and propose another bill in the future. What are some of the solutions we'd like to see? *keeping in mind that we aren't starting from scratch. It seems solutions are dominated by who pays for healthcare: single payer, employer based, individual tax credits, etc. Cost cutting solutions tend to revolve around malpractice protection. I think one outlooked area is education. It is very expensive and academically difficult to pursue a medical career. That limits the number of people who are willing and able to pursue a medical career and also influences how much salary those who do need in order to both pay off educational debt and enjory the quality of life their efforts have earned. I believe that finding a way to make medical school less expensive, or even free, would increase the number of qualified people in the medical industry and reduce costs by increase the supply to meet an increasing demand. Paying for the education could be achieved by a local govts cooperartion with insurers and Hospitals to pay into federal managed scholarship programs that contracted graduates to their region. For example Beverly Hills CA has no trouble getting Doctors, Nurses, Physician Assistants, Physical Therapists, and etc. Meanwhile Morgantown WVA does. In trade for scholarships graduates owe a contracted number of years to work in a designated part of the country. Rather than Hospitals and insurers having to spend money travling around trying to recruit professionals, offering bonuses, and etc They could direct funds to a federal established scholarship program which would then place graduates. Local govts (cities, counties, states) would contribute as having such professionals in their localities would benefit their communities in the long run for obvious reasons. And of course there would need to be some federal money in the pot as well. A single payer system is the best in my opinion but unfortunately I don't believe we are ready for it. We run annual deficits and pay as much towards interest on debt as we do all non DOD discretionary spending. We need serious changes to our tax policy, defense spending reprioritization,and banking reform before we can embark on a the journey towards single payer. Attempting to do sure now may bit like reshuffling deck chair on the Titanic. Our tax policy is inadequate to support what we all ready have and our spending priorities are all stick and absolutely zero walking softly. What plans do the rest think would work: expansion of Medicare, massive tax credits, health insurance accounts, etc?

Any time it is proclaimed that a whole group behaves a certian way it provides cover to the worst amongst them.

It is all sport for the right. The more carefully crafted fact filled an argument from a progressive position the harder the right laughs. I use to think they laughed as a tactic to deflect but have come to realize their laughs are genuine. It is actually funny to them that progessive don't realize they don't care about the facts. It cracks them up that people waste their time being so careful when they simply don't give a f#ck. They never cared about how Hillary Clinton checked her emails, never cared whether or not the ACA was good policy, don't care about about melting glaciers, and etc. It is all a game and we're all suckers for dwelling on the facts in their opinion. An analogy: Two college guys are attempting to date the same girl. One purely just wants a one night stand to win a bet going with his pals. The other guy thinks he may love the girl and wants a relationship. The girl herself wants a monogamous relationship and superficially likes both guys about the same. Clearly the girl should choose to date the guy which actually cares for her. Problem is that the guy who just wants to use her to win a bet is a liar. So the girl has no idea which guy is better for her as they both present themselves as meaningfully interested. The fact that the guy who cares is the only real option here is irrelevant. He is forced to compete with the liar. Not only is he forced to compete but if he loses he lose the girl and she will end up hurt. The facts provide him zero advantage. The guy who cares must find a way to sell above and beyond the facts because merely attempting to studiously refernce the facts of the situation will merely get him mocked and laughed at. The guy who's looking to win a bet doesn't care who is better for the girl. He doesn't care about girl or the other guy. He has his own agenda which exists outside of the facts which the other guy and the girl in the situation care about. He has his own alternative facts which drive him. In my opinion if progressives are going to start winning elections they need to stop believing they can beat the horny guy looking to win a bet with facts alone. We can't. Move over we need to recognize when we are being made fun of for trying. Sean Spicer as Press Sec. is the Trump admin laughing at the press. Spicer's job is to mock the press. Yet journalists waste time writing intricate questions to ask Spicer hoping he'll take one serious. Shame on the journalists they should know better by now. Rather than asking Spicer a single question they should all should walk out and just print that the White House refused to send out a legitimate reppresentive to answer questions. Because there is no point in treating Spicer as a source of information. For starters his goal is to distract attention away from things that matter and to avoid those things he can't distract from. And secondly he doesn't actually have any information to provided even if he wanted to. He isn't privy to any of the information journalists are hoping to get. Trump and Bannon chuckle everytime they send Spicer out there because they know doing so it just a big middle finger to the press. Facts may be on our side but we are still forced to compete and superficially allowing ourselve to get openly mocked daily by clowns like Spicer and Kelly Ann Conway hurts. We need to turn out backs to lies the way they turn their backs to facts. Their alternative facts exist because they have alternative goals and motivations. They are out there selling goals and aspirations while progessives are running around trying to sell facts. I think 9 times out of 10 aspirations sell better than facts. The right make no attempt to honestly match up their goals to our facts yet we constantly try to match up facts to their goals. It is an error, We need to show how facts align with our goals and just ignore their lies.

I want to agree but 63 million voters couldn't or didn't care to see through Trump's con. I don't have faith they will remember or care about this bill. I'll use the poster tar as an example since we are all familiar. He understood Trump was a liar and snake oil salesmen but he still voted for him anyway purely based on us vs them racial politics. Not repealing Obamacare or anything else tangible mattered.

What prediction? I listed things Trump has proposed and has already done.

The budget he has proposed would basically end the State Department, EPA, and public assistance as we know it. Without diplomacy around the world we're in a trouble positision. Especially when we have a President who has put Iran "on notice", threatened North Korea, demagugued China, repeatedly insulted Mexico, falsly accussed England of illicit intellignce practices, is treating NATO like its bookie, and out of the blue stop sh!t with Australia all inside of 2 months. As for the environmental rollbacks, the results will take a generation to reverse if we just wait for Trump's presidency to expire. Every at his worst President Bush still understood he was the President of a sovereign nation full pof real flesh and bllod people. That he was filling a designed role. Trump doesn't seem to get that. Trump appears to view this all as pageantry. Like it doesn't really matters what happens provided the headlines are big. It is a dangerous situation to be in as we (USA) are now basically relying on our adversaries to have sane adult leadership. We are one bad day in Yemen, Iran, Syria, and North Korea away from an Iraq level conflict and one bad week away from a world war level event in China. All jinge on others having the cooler head. Trump the private citizen sued people who made ugly claims about him. If the role were reversed Trump would be suing the federal govt for libel and damaging his brand.

What is "it", the press doesn't govern so what are you referencing?

I don't fully understand what you are trying to say. This reads more as a question to me than it does a belief or theory. You are referencing feelings without any definition, menatl development, or biological processes. There are tangible things that happen to a person as they experience joy, beauty, etc; increased pulse rate, perspiration, change in appetite, etc. It is all just chemical triggers after all. The brain also develops. Base on ones environment (experiences) various parts of the brain grow or shrink. Are you saying there is a lynchpin or that we are the sum of experience(v something else)?

Maybe. I think the issue is a toss up. Eise, who has made the best arguments on this topic in my opinion leans towards he was probably real. Plenty of pages of discussion here to get caught up on if you are interested in contributing to this thread.

Who wrote The Gospel of Luke?