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/)

dc koop Mar 27th 2016 5:12 pm

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 11906891)
I for one don't want Sanders to win. I thoroughly respect him, and appreciate a well fought fight, but I don't think free education for all is a good idea, and I don't think he has what it takes to be a president. I guess it's fine for him to keep battling on; the longer he and Hillary have 'respectable' debates, it just makes the Republicans look that much more obviously dysfunctional.

Ask nine out of ten high school seniors in this country who Thurgood Marshall was and they wouldn't have a clue. On the other hand they'd all know where Homer Simpson lives

dc koop Mar 27th 2016 5:14 pm

Re: 2016 Election
 
Sanders is doing as well as he is because Hillary is such a mediocre candidate

Steerpike Mar 27th 2016 6:01 pm

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11906906)
But that's not his position, as I understand it....

He's asking that all public community colleges/universities be tuition free.

Unless I'm mistaken, Harvard, Stanford, Amherst etc. etc. will continue to cost <$60,000> yr.

So that's not 'free education for all'.


Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11906908)
It's "free tuition at all public colleges regardless of ability to pay", which is poor public policy imo. Inevitably segments that can well afford tuition end up being beneficiaries of such "largesse".


Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11906917)
I've given my view as to why it's poor public policy to make it "free for all". Far better to concentrate support on those that cannot afford to attend.

OK, I need to restate / clarify my position. I believe 'free tuition at all public colleges regardless of ability to pay' is not a good idea. I think such a benefit should at least be means-tested, so that we are are not giving money to people who can afford to pay for themselves, and I think any such benefit should be focused on 'practical' courses - STEM, basically. I don't think it makes sense to spend tax dollars sending some wealthy kid to study history of art for 4 years.

I think a fairly simple modification to the current loan system is all that is needed.

I also think we should phase out Social Security for high net-worth individuals. Why should someone who has millions in assets still receive social security?

Steerpike Mar 27th 2016 6:08 pm

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 11906941)
Ask nine out of ten high school seniors in this country who Thurgood Marshall was and they wouldn't have a clue. On the other hand they'd all know where Homer Simpson lives

Which tells us that we have a lousy education system, but has nothing to do with free college. High School is already free.

I would probably support another non-liberal position, while we are at it - make it a lot easier to fire teachers based on performance. The teachers unions are far too powerful and are protecting poor performing teachers at the expense of the students. ETA: I would also, however, at the same time find a way to vastly improve the pay that teachers get.

RoadWarriorFromLP Mar 28th 2016 12:49 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11906939)
And that, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with the Democratic Party's Super Delegate maneuvering.

If the Republicans relied more on their version of superdelegates, then they wouldn't have given you Donald Trump to complain about.

In any case, Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat. If he wanted to run as a Democrat, then it would have helped his credibility among committed Democrats if he had been an, er, Democrat.

Anyway, Sanders is coming in second place. It seems that Sanders fans aren't really interested in majority rule if it goes against them.


Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11906939)
Never say 'never' - except when saying 'you never know'

It's an arithmetic issue. I wouldn't say that 2+2 could equal 22 just because the idea of that appeals to some people.

scrubbedexpat099 Mar 28th 2016 1:02 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 11906942)
Sanders is doing as well as he is because Hillary is such a mediocre candidate

Mediocre is a compliment.

scrubbedexpat091 Mar 28th 2016 3:54 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Same here with doctors from what I can tell. Some areas have more domestic born doctors then others but higher education is an exapenaive experience here as well. A basic bachelors and your looking at 15k to 20k in debt at graduation.

Short term vocational can be just as bad but with far fewer options school wise.


A basic 1 year medical lab assistant course your looking at 10k unless you live in Vancouver where there is 1 public school that offers it. Around 4k there but a 2 to 3 year wait list.

BC where I am has started to recruit foreign nurses but from the US/UK/Ireland. We currently have a shortage of nurses especially in the specialty nursing where there just isnt enough so only option is overseas recruiting.




Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 11906938)
The problem in this country at present is that many professional positions have to be filled from foreign sources. America is relying on imported brains

How many doctors, dentists, engineers, physicists etc are American born these days ?

Where I live reading the names of the highly skilled nursing staff at our large local hospital staff from surgeons down to RNs is like reading a page from the Calcutta or Beijing telephone directory

In short it's just become too difficult for many in America who have the brains and ability but not the money


dc koop Mar 28th 2016 4:47 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Jsmth321 (Post 11907311)
Same here with doctors from what I can tell. Some areas have more domestic born doctors then others but higher education is an exapenaive experience here as well. A basic bachelors and your looking at 15k to 20k in debt at graduation.

Short term vocational can be just as bad but with far fewer options school wise.


A basic 1 year medical lab assistant course your looking at 10k unless you live in Vancouver where there is 1 public school that offers it. Around 4k there but a 2 to 3 year wait list.

BC where I am has started to recruit foreign nurses but from the US/UK/Ireland. We currently have a shortage of nurses especially in the specialty nursing where there just isnt enough so only option is overseas recruiting.


My daughter took a four year nursing course at a very good nursing school and got her Bachelor's. It takes perseverance and intense study. There was a high drop out rate during that time mostly because they couldn't hack it and some found that having to dissect parts of a corpse or when getting hands on at a hospital didn't realize how gruesome and unsettling such an environment could be at times and realized a bit late that they didn't have the vocation for it after all.

The Army offered her a commission after she graduated but while having an aptitude for the work she didn't think she had much of a one for military life with it.

She is one of the very few Caucasians amongst the nursing staff at her hospital. Most come from Mexico, South America, the Philipines or Asia and took their training there before arriving in the States

scrubbedexpat091 Mar 28th 2016 5:47 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Canada makes it very difficult for foreign trained nurses to work here so we still dont have many. The govt of BC is looseing the requirements a bit but only for the UK/US/Ireland at the moment.

Not likely to see them making it easier for nurses trained in Phillipines or Mexico or such to come and work here.

The nurses union doesnt want an influx of nurses willing to work for less and weaking the unions power.

An RN ranges from low 30s to low 40s per hour, LPNs make a bit less.

Specialties can earn more.

Psychiatric nurses get different training then RNs but make roughly the same.

Nursing programs are ultra competive to get into and most will not get a seat in the program and there are a fair amount of drop outs as well.

RNs require 4 year bachelor of nursing here. LPN I think is a 2 year program.









Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 11907355)
My daughter took a four year nursing course at a very good nursing school and got her Bachelor's. It takes perseverance and intense study. There was a high drop out rate during that time mostly because they couldn't hack it and some found that having to dissect parts of a corpse or when getting hands on at a hospital didn't realize how gruesome and unsettling such an environment could be at times and realized a bit late that they didn't have the vocation for it after all.

The Army offered her a commission after she graduated but while having an aptitude for the work she didn't think she had much of a one for military life with it.

She is one of the very few Caucasians amongst the nursing staff at her hospital. Most come from Mexico, South America, the Philipines or Asia and took their training there before arriving in the States


sir_eccles Mar 28th 2016 9:11 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Giantaxe Mar 28th 2016 9:19 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 11907537)

Old "news". He's backed off from that position a little since then.

MMcD Mar 28th 2016 9:24 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11907146)
If the Republicans relied more on their version of superdelegates, then they wouldn't have given you Donald Trump to complain about.

In a Democracy a rule which might serve to prevent a horror like Donald Trump from getting the nomination whilst, at the same time, subverting the will of the electorate - is no more desirable than one which might serve to prevent an act of terrorism by denying entry of Muslims to this country.

Both might prevent a nightmare; both are undemocratic.


Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11907146)
In any case, Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat. If he wanted to run as a Democrat, then it would have helped his credibility among committed Democrats if he had been an, er, Democrat.

And how would you have proposed he do that?

Sanders has spent his entire political life in Vermont, a State where party registration is non-existent!
Even if he'd wished to - there's no way to officially register in Vermont as a Democrat.

Despite that, he's caucused as a Democrat for 25 years (since 1991) - first as a Congressman and then a Senator.

The current Democratic Party Rules don't mandate Presidential candidates be registered party members.

When he declared his intention to run as a Democrat the DNC affirmed that his candidacy complied with their rules.


Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11907146)
Anyway, Sanders is coming in second place. It seems that Sanders fans aren't really interested in majority rule if it goes against them.

It's an arithmetic issue. I wouldn't say that 2+2 could equal 22 just because the idea of that appeals to some people.

On the contrary - "It seems that Sanders' fans ARE(sic) interested in majority rule"

However, a so-called "majority rule" which is dependant upon Super Delegates in order to attain that majority - is un-democratic!

Super Delegate Power is antithetical to people power.
And by people power I simply mean: 1voice = 1 vote = 'majority rule'

As for 'arithmetic issues' - here's some 'arithmetic'......apparently in the '08 election one Super Delegate vote was equivalent to 10,000 voters individual votes. So yeah....with that scenario your "2+2" can equal 22,000.....

RoadWarriorFromLP Mar 28th 2016 9:45 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11907555)
In a Democracy a rule which might serve to prevent a horror like Donald Trump from getting the nomination whilst, at the same time, subverting the will of the electorate - is no more desirable than one which might serve to prevent an act of terrorism by denying entry of Muslims to this country.

Both might prevent a nightmare; both are undemocratic.

The party is a private organization. It is free to make its own rules. If you don't like the rules of that party, then find a different one that you prefer.


Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11907555)
And how would you have proposed he do that?

If Sanders wanted to be a Democrat, then he should have become one.

The point is that he's trying to leverage the benefits of a club to which he does not belong, so it is exceedingly naive at best and astoundingly arrogant at worst for anyone else to demand that everyone who has devoted themselves to that party to roll out the red carpet for Sanders when he spent decades avoiding membership.



Originally Posted by MMcD (Post 11907555)
Even if he'd wished to - there's no way to officially register in Vermont as a Democrat.

Yet Patrick Leahy somehow manages to be the Democratic senator from Vermont. Go figure.

As for the math(s), Sanders is already in second place and there aren't enough opportunities left for that to change. The failure to recognize such lousy odds just reinforces the notion that Sanders' diehard supporters have a lot in common with the Tea Party, i.e. a lot of populist enthusiasm but little grasp of the realities of politics or the implications of being a minority faction within a broader political coalition.

zargof Mar 28th 2016 10:46 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Fascinating article by Trump's former communications director. Pretty much confirms that his whole campaign is all about his ego.

http://www.xojane.com/issues/stephan...paign-defector

Leslie Mar 28th 2016 11:38 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11907595)
Fascinating article by Trump's former communications director. Pretty much confirms that his whole campaign is all about his ego.

http://www.xojane.com/issues/stephan...paign-defector

I found no surprises in that article. :blink:


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 4:19 am.

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.