British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   The Trailer Park (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/)
-   -   2016 Election (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/2016-election-855107/)

Giantaxe Feb 18th 2016 5:26 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing (Post 11871763)
Free will, maybe?

American Catholics tend to adhere less to papal teachings than do Catholics in general. For example, most use birth control.

SultanOfSwing Feb 18th 2016 5:29 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11871766)
American Catholics tend to adhere less to papal teachings than do Catholics in general. For example, most use birth control.

One would certainly hope so, otherwise there'd be a damn sight more than 320 million of us here :lol:

Steerpike Feb 18th 2016 5:45 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing (Post 11871697)
He lays out the details on his campaign site. Yes, there will be some tax increases but in reality, a lot of it will also be redistributing existing taxes. A great many articles I have read seem to indicate the the single payer healthcare plan would end up saving both us, and our employers money compared to the ACA as it stands now. Also, he's not going to be initiating these overnight, it will be a process over years as the revenue is redistributed.

At least, for now anyway, he's the only one talking about ideas that will make the situation in America better for everyone. Even if this is all for naught (and I hope it isn't), surely he's at the very least sown the seeds for some positive changes down the line.

Obama originally wanted ACA to be single payer but had no chance, in the administration's view, of getting that through, and so removed the single payer aspect. How do you imagine Sanders will get his plan approved, realistically, given the intense opposition that the current ACA faced?

On the education front - is he proposing free education for all courses / subjects / vocations? That is - a student could study 'history of art' for 4 years and have that paid for? I know that in some circles that is supported due to the 'benefits to society' of allowing people to study non-vocational subjects, but I think it would be more likely to fly in the US if they would say courses like engineering would be free.

zargof Feb 18th 2016 5:56 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11871783)
Obama originally wanted ACA to be single payer but had no chance, in the administration's view, of getting that through, and so removed the single payer aspect. How do you imagine Sanders will get his plan approved, realistically, given the intense opposition that the current ACA faced?

On the education front - is he proposing free education for all courses / subjects / vocations? That is - a student could study 'history of art' for 4 years and have that paid for? I know that in some circles that is supported due to the 'benefits to society' of allowing people to study non-vocational subjects, but I think it would be more likely to fly in the US if they would say courses like engineering would be free.

Based on the current Congress, he has no chance. Just like Clinton's proposal to expand the ACA has no chance. That's why Sanders calls for political revolution. Whether that is any more likely is a different debate. But to me it reflects the political reality that the government doesn't help the people any more. I think more and more people are waking up to that fact, and sooner or later there is going to be a rebalance.

SultanOfSwing Feb 18th 2016 5:57 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11871783)
Obama originally wanted ACA to be single payer but had no chance, in the administration's view, of getting that through, and so removed the single payer aspect. How do you imagine Sanders will get his plan approved, realistically, given the intense opposition that the current ACA faced?

That explains why the ACA is basically shit, then. If the Democrats can regain control of the Senate, it may be easier.

The fact is, single payer is the only solution, otherwise ACA or not, people are going to continue going into debt trying to pay their medical bills.


Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11871783)
On the education front - is he proposing free education for all courses / subjects / vocations? That is - a student could study 'history of art' for 4 years and have that paid for? I know that in some circles that is supported due to the 'benefits to society' of allowing people to study non-vocational subjects, but I think it would be more likely to fly in the US if they would say courses like engineering would be free.

I'm not sure how that would work. Education for education's sake is still beneficial though, even if STEM degrees are more useful in the long run. Perhaps they could make those ones vastly more affordable than they already are. I think everyone can agree that a four year degree costing near enough as much as a house is beyond ridiculous.

Again, it comes down to distribution. There is, as Boiler said, plenty of money floating around. Maybe Bernie is only a starting point, maybe he won't win but he has put forth these ideas and they won't be forgotten. Not by my generation and certainly not by that of my children. It might not be the president of 2016 or even 2020 that implements real and useful change, but I certainly hope it happens in my lifetime. Trump likes to wax lyrical about 'making America great'. Bernie Sanders is the only politician in the race who has policies that can actually achieve that. That's why I will be voting for him in the primary, whatever may happen after that.

sir_eccles Feb 18th 2016 6:00 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11871783)
Obama originally wanted ACA to be single payer but had no chance, in the administration's view, of getting that through, and so removed the single payer aspect. How do you imagine Sanders will get his plan approved, realistically, given the intense opposition that the current ACA faced?

I don't know about Bernie's specific proposal. I did however read an interesting thing recently about the ACA. While the insurers have been bitching about losing money on ACA coverage (can't drop that one family spending millions on a terminal illness) some have been minting it on Medicaid expansion plans.

Dirty little secret: Insurers actually are making a mint from Obamacare - LA Times

I could see a gradual expansion upwards of medicaid perhaps?

Lion in Winter Feb 18th 2016 6:04 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by username.exe (Post 11871725)
Traditionally, I believe so (JFK etc.).

Pope should stay out of politics. If only the candidates would keep faith or of politics too.

He's a latin american priest, and despite the church's very reactionary views on some things, in many cases the priests there have been in the forefront of the battles against a long series of right wing and military dictatorships (many put in place and supported by the US) and for human, civil and social rights . In many cases priests risked and lost their lives in this work. It's not at all surprising to me that this one would speak up. And while I don't want religion in government, this kind of activism by priests is about the most (only?) useful thing they do.

Anian Feb 18th 2016 6:17 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11871747)
Do Roman Catholics actually acknowledge there are other types of Christian?

Some Evangelicals and Baptists refuse to accept that Catholics are Christian.

username.exe Feb 18th 2016 7:25 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Lion in Winter (Post 11871805)
He's a latin american priest, and despite the church's very reactionary views on some things, in many cases the priests there have been in the forefront of the battles against a long series of right wing and military dictatorships (many put in place and supported by the US) and for human, civil and social rights . In many cases priests risked and lost their lives in this work. It's not at all surprising to me that this one would speak up. And while I don't want religion in government, this kind of activism by priests is about the most (only?) useful thing they do.

You raise an interesting point, and one I am inclined to agree with; many might argue that interference from religious leaders over the years has caused harm as well.

Serious question: should the Pope level the playing field and give us an assessment on the efficacy of each of the candidates Christian faith?

username.exe Feb 18th 2016 7:40 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Anian (Post 11871821)
Some Evangelicals and Baptists refuse to accept that Catholics are Christian.

Probably the majority.

Their major issue with Catholicism being there is but one intercessor between God and mankind - Jesus Christ. The existence of an alternative 'head of church' doesn't quite fit into that equation.

Most evangelicals are somewhat suspicious of the Catholic Church. If anything, Donald might have won a few of them over.

Lion in Winter Feb 18th 2016 7:43 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by username.exe (Post 11871896)
You raise an interesting point, and one I am inclined to agree with; many might argue that interference from religious leaders over the years has caused harm as well.

Serious question: should the Pope level the playing field and give us an assessment on the efficacy of each of the candidates Christian faith?

I don't think he should, in tbe sense he has no obligation to be even-handed. Also, although he framed it that way this time, it doesn't have to be done in terms of measuring their christianity but rather commenting on their treatment of human values. Christianity scores would be problematic from many angles.

Steerpike Feb 18th 2016 7:53 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Anyone care to offer an explanation as to why Trump is scoring big with Evangelicals? This, to me, is utter craziness.

Trump back on top in national poll - POLITICO

Quote: "Trump leads among all demographic groups, including men, women, white evangelicals, moderates and those describing themselves as somewhat conservative. Among those describing themselves as very conservative, Trump holds a 5-point lead on Cruz ... "

He says many things to win support from many groups, but I can't imagine what evangelicals could read into his ramblings that would cause them to support him over the likes of Cruz or Rubio, who sound like they are preachers on stage.

This could set an interesting historic precedent; conventional wisdom has always been that a Republican candidate has to veer far right to capture the nomination, but here we see Trump not doing this at all. Very odd.

RoadWarriorFromLP Feb 18th 2016 7:56 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11871928)
Anyone care to offer an explanation as to why Trump is scoring big with Evangelicals?

Because he's a xenophobe (or at least pretends to be one.)

To understand social conservatism among whites, you have to realize that it's ultimately an ethnic identity movement.

There are quite a few Hispanic and black social conservatives, but they tend not to align with the GOP because they realize that the social conservatives don't just favor prayer in school and abortion restrictions, but that they also want Jim Crow. They aren't natural allies in spite of some shared values.

scrubbedexpat099 Feb 18th 2016 7:58 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Hillary thinks O Care is wonderful, she has been bought and paid, nothings changing.

Giantaxe Feb 18th 2016 8:47 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Boiler (Post 11871938)
Hillary thinks O Care is wonderful, she has been bought and paid, nothings changing.

She acknowledged in the Democratic debate that it needs to be worked on and improved.


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 5:06 pm.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.