Do you approve of the job the President of the United States is doing?

[-Apples-]

I was looking at the costs of building the wall. What I realized is that building a wall across US and Mexico will cost billions rather than trillions, which is a lot cheaper than how much the ACA really costed. This is true even if the wall was as fancy as the Great Wall of China with Star Wars technology embedded in towers. Billions sound like a lot, but it's almost nothing compared to some more expensive government programs that caused tax hikes.

- - - Post Merge - - -

Yep and guess who's going to paying for it....(hint it's not Mexico)

I don't know.

 

[xanisha]

I don't know.

The tax payers obviously. If mexico is not paying for it then us tax payers will have to front the bill.

 

[-Apples-]

It would be worse off if it never got passed since a lot of people who got health through the ACA wouldn't have been able to get it otherwise. That and people will get pissed off if repealing the ACA causes them to lose their health insurance which in turn means they will be motivated to vote out the people who took away their healthcare.

So you think we wouldn't be in a worse shape after repeal than if we never even passed it. I can tell that people are strictly opposed to repealing the law, but the reasons why Trump and the Republicans won is a bit more complicated. I can blame political correctness and how it's gotten out of control for being part of the reason why Trump won (which is what I call "revenge voting"), but there's a lot of other reasons why he won. The ACA repeal promise isn't what lead him to winning.

- - - Post Merge - - -

The tax payers obviously. If mexico is not paying for it then us tax payers will have to front the bill.

I knew we would end up being the ones paying for the wall if Mexico couldn't get involved. I was confused when you said "guess who's paying for it", but I knew it would happen. But our funds go to our nation's property.

 

[xanisha]

I knew we would end up being the ones paying for the wall if Mexico couldn't get involved. I was confused when you said "guess who's paying for it", but I knew it would happen. But our funds go to our nation's property.

I meant it as sarcasm one of the big promises was to build a wall and to have mexico pay for it.

 

[Red Cat]

I was looking at the costs of building the wall. What I realized is that building a wall across US and Mexico will cost billions rather than trillions, which is a lot cheaper than how much the ACA really costed. This is true even if the wall was as fancy as the Great Wall of China with Star Wars technology embedded in towers. Billions sound like a lot, but it's almost nothing compared to some more expensive government programs that caused tax hikes.

Comparing the cost of a fence / wall to healthcare is like comparing apples to oranges. Treating injuries and illnesses for millions of people is going to cost much more than even the most high-tech wall imaginable. Keeping people healthy is absolutely a worthwhile use of government funds; there aren't many better ways to spend the money than that. Building a wall on the other hand is a lot more questionable. It's not even guaranteed to work because people can still enter illegally in other ways like taking a "vacation" by plane and then staying here indefinitely.

 

[Envy]

Donald Trump should pay for the wall himself. Remember a million is "a small loan" in his mind. Surely he can do it.

 

[xanisha]

Building a wall on the other hand is a lot more questionable. It's not even guaranteed to work because people can still enter illegally in other ways like taking a "vacation" by plane and then staying here indefinitely.

This is very true, many studies show that a good portion of the people that are here illegally come here legally first and then just overstay their visas. So a wall won't really stop much of anything, instead if we really want illegal immigration reform we should implement a better visa system. But so many people seem to just love this wall or is convinced that it will work and that there are no flaws with it, so I doubt visa reform will happen.

 

[-Apples-]

Comparing the cost of a fence / wall to healthcare is like comparing apples to oranges.

I'm getting sick of being told that. I was told this on gaming boards when I compared ACNL to ACHHD and ACaF to ACCF. They were trying to tell me that they don't compare, but I still choose to compare them because they're still Animal Crossing games. I don't care how different the gameplay is. They're still in the same franchise.

I know it doesn't sound like that healthcare and border wall compare, but they're still both political actions. I was trying to point out how much cheaper the wall is opposed to government-funded programs for individuals. Not only that, but by even spending on health insurance for many, they're still not guaranteed healthcare. Doctors are very unlikely to accept patients that have insurance that does not pay well (for example, Medicaid). Without insurance, they couldn't get healthcare because they are poor. With this kind of insurance, they wouldn't get healthcare because they wouldn't pay well, as they underestimate the costs of labor. This is a lose-lose situation, yet it would be worse to have socialized medicine since it wastes more money.

Socialized medicine is not just expensive, but it's also making healthcare harder to get. In places like Canada and UK, doctors have a maximum wage. That means after operating on a certain number of patients, they reach the salary cap. At this case, they would not get paid anymore no matter how much they work. So they stop working after they reach the cap. This creates healthcare waiting times, which is bad for those who need healthcare desperately. When I was assigned surgeries (where I undergo surgery), I get mine in less than a month. In places with universal healthcare, you may have to wait up to two years (or even longer) to get the surgery you were assigned. I know this doesn't happen in the United States, but that's because we were paying doctors by patient rather than maximum wage. As much as it's good to care for those who are poor, we should also care about those who provide healthcare.

So socialized medicine is not just more expensive than building a wall, but it's also not cost-effective. Would you rather not spend on something, or would you rather spend millions just to get very little output?

 

[Haskell]

I just realized something.

Does anyone actually care what anyone has to say about politics on the internet?

It's a waste of time to be discussing with someone your opinions when in reality, they're worthless. Our opinions are worthless.

 

[King Dorado]

Russia is pretty obvious, but I wonder why India is #2 on that list.

I wondered the same after media showed euphoric citizens there celebrating his election, i guess its bc Trump has been vocal about USA doing more business with India, and about India becoming a bigger part of global security efforts... also, i think their current Prime Minister is a sort of Indian version of Trump...

 

[Red Cat]

I'm getting sick of being told that. I was told this on gaming boards when I compared ACNL to ACHHD and ACaF to ACCF. They were trying to tell me that they don't compare, but I still choose to compare them because they're still Animal Crossing games. I don't care how different the gameplay is. They're still in the same franchise.

I know it doesn't sound like that healthcare and border wall compare, but they're still both political actions. I was trying to point out how much cheaper the wall is opposed to government-funded programs for individuals. Not only that, but by even spending on health insurance for many, they're still not guaranteed healthcare. Doctors are very unlikely to accept patients that have insurance that does not pay well (for example, Medicaid). Without insurance, they couldn't get healthcare because they are poor. With this kind of insurance, they wouldn't get healthcare because they wouldn't pay well, as they underestimate the costs of labor. This is a lose-lose situation, yet it would be worse to have socialized medicine since it wastes more money.

Socialized medicine is not just expensive, but it's also making healthcare harder to get. In places like Canada and UK, doctors have a maximum wage. That means after operating on a certain number of patients, they reach the salary cap. At this case, they would not get paid anymore no matter how much they work. So they stop working after they reach the cap. This creates healthcare waiting times, which is bad for those who need healthcare desperately. When I was assigned surgeries (where I undergo surgery), I get mine in less than a month. In places with universal healthcare, you may have to wait up to two years (or even longer) to get the surgery you were assigned. I know this doesn't happen in the United States, but that's because we were paying doctors by patient rather than maximum wage. As much as it's good to care for those who are poor, we should also care about those who provide healthcare.

So socialized medicine is not just more expensive than building a wall, but it's also not cost-effective. Would you rather not spend on something, or would you rather spend millions just to get very little output?

I hate to bring out the analogy again, but comparing Animal Crossing games to public policy is like comparing apples to oranges. I'm not an expert on healthcare in Canada and the U.K., so maybe people from those places can respond to your comments about their healthcare systems. The issue with healthcare anywhere is supply and demand. There are a lot of people who get sick and injured and not enough people who are skilled enough to become doctors, surgeons, etc. as well a scarcity of medical equipment and space. So the question becomes how to distribute healthcare in the most optimal way. In the United States, you can get the best healthcare in the world... if you have the money to pay for it. You may be able to get a procedure done faster here than in other countries, but people with lower incomes here may never get a procedure they need because they can't afford it.

It's kind of an ethical question as to what is the best way to distribute healthcare. The U.S. gives people a larger incentive (pays them more) to become doctors, but that means you have to pay more to get medical care. If there were no restrictions on how much doctors and surgeons could get payed, then theoretically there's no limit you could be charged to get a life-saving procedure. Most people are uncomfortable with allowing people to put a price on a life this way.

 

[Bowie]

Trump administration has informed the Palestinian Authority that it is freezing the transfer of the $221,000,000 authorised by the Obama administration in its final hours. Who wants to bet it never gets sent? Trump will probably want to use it to replace all the furniture in the Oval Office with golden furniture (because changing the curtains wasn't enough).

 

[vel]

I just realized something.

Does anyone actually care what anyone has to say about politics on the internet?

It's a waste of time to be discussing with someone your opinions when in reality, they're worthless. Our opinions are worthless.

You do know there's something called a polite and civil argument where both sides take turns giving their opinions and we both mutually agree, or politely disagree, right? We aren't shoving our opinions to make people change theirs, we're putting our opinions out there so people can understand each other. Our opinions aren't worthless; they help us build relationships with others. There's a difference.

 

[Haskell]

You do know there's something called a polite and civil argument where both sides take turns giving their opinions and we both mutually agree, or politely disagree, right? We aren't shoving our opinions to make people change theirs, we're putting our opinions out there so people can understand each other. Our opinions aren't worthless; they help us build relationships with others. There's a difference.

Depends on the way you look at it. But in all reality, when do people change their opinions from a few messages between strangers?

 

[Red Cat]

I just realized something.

Does anyone actually care what anyone has to say about politics on the internet?

It's a waste of time to be discussing with someone your opinions when in reality, they're worthless. Our opinions are worthless.

You've spent enough time discussing your opinions here. What's with the sudden change of heart?

 

[Haskell]

I realized that I spent hours that I could be doing homework trying to exchange my opinion on here.

I realized that these political threads give bad first impressions. It carries out to other parts on TBT.

I realized it doesn't start friendships, it ends friendships, it blocks friendships from starting.

I realized that it's not worth it.

 

[Red Cat]

I realized that I spent hours that I could be doing homework trying to exchange my opinion on here.

I realized that these political threads give bad first impressions. It carries out to other parts on TBT.

I realized that it's not worth it.

Okay. Bon voyage. We'll survive without you.

 

[seliph]

Depends on the way you look at it. But in all reality, when do people change their opinions from a few messages between strangers?

If posts are informative and people are open minded it can happen really easily

I realized that I spent hours that I could be doing homework trying to exchange my opinion on here.

I realized that these political threads give bad first impressions. It carries out to other parts on TBT.

I realized that it's not worth it.

It is worth it though. It's the future of a country and of millions of people, it's worth discussing. Just because your conversations with people held up like wet bread doesn't mean people haven't been taking in information and thinking of what's been said here.

As for first impressions most of us have seen each other elsewhere on the forum so, meh. Why not go do your homework rather than try to silence the rest of us?

 

[Red Cat]

It is worth it though. It's the future of a country and of millions of people, it's worth discussing. Just because your conversations with people held up like wet bread doesn't mean people haven't been taking in information and thinking of what's been said here.

As for first impressions most of us have seen each other elsewhere on the forum so, meh. Why not go do your homework rather than try to silence the rest of us?

No! Don't encourage him goddammit!

 

[Haskell]

I'm not even taking a negative approach to this. I don't like how some people are. This is what I am talking about. I give my opinion and it damages my reputation, any possible friendships, and it gives bad first impressions.

- - - Post Merge - - -

No! Don't encourage him goddammit!

I'm not going to get upset because he is stating that what's happening will affect the future.