civilservant

Same way you would hack down one tree while avoiding the whole forest I reckon.

scrubbedexpat099

I am having an issue with understanding what the expectation is, so you have created an essentially unlimited supply of cheap labour, what is the long term plan? What does this future society look like?

We have been talking about the GND, the need for affordable housing, how will this impact US Housing, Healthcare, Food, Energy.

Leslie

I wouldn't want Boiler for my dentist.

Leslie

It doesn't take much imagination ... it's the way the country has operated since its founding. The issue seems to be with melanin content, not cheap labor. Yes, many will stay. Yes, many will raise their families here and future generations will not be laborers. Just like in previous generations with Germans, Italians, Irish, Chinese etc etc, ad nauseam, infinitum. And, YES, the country may become more brown (sowwy!) but, unless white people start having more babies, that's going to happen anyway. Just deal with it.

scrubbedexpat099

Got to laugh, who mentioned colour?

Anyway just to give you some numbers Asia has 4.5 Billion people, 3x that of Africa and 7x that of the Americas so I would expect it to get Yellower not Browner.

Colorado had a native population of 8,000 before the Pikes Peak rush now it is getting on for 6 million.

Agricultural production has increased, and from what I can gather we produce 10% of our food requirements but there is a big switch of water to non agricultural purposes. Sadly nobody has worked out how to increase the water supply to match.

Probably not that many people on here are familiar with Colorado, let's look at California, lets keep it within reason, the population doubles, what does that look like?

Leslie

The color issue wasn't directed at you specifically but rather the entire collective "Build The Wall" coalition. Regardless, you don't have to mention color when talking about migrants from the South --- it is intrinsic.

What are you talking about? What proof do you have that the population of California will double? Supply and demand. Unless there is enough work for a gazillion laborers then there won't be a gazillion laborers there.

scrubbedexpat099

Because it has doubled twice since 1945? Plenty of people still alive who were born when California had a population of 10m.

If you look to the past people immigrated to the US in hope I would imagine most did not have a job to go to, with an expectation that it would be better than the situation they were in. There are Billions who could have that view now, so do you scratch around in poverty in say India or try your luck California? I know what I would do.

BritInParis

2014 would be a conservative estimate. The left had been laying into ever since he got involved in promoting the Obama birther conspiracy. Obama roasted him for doing so at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2011. By 2014 he was dropping heavy hints that he would run and Jon Stewart kept begging him to on the Daily Show for the supposed comedic value. Unsurprisingly Stewart's kept a low profile since then.

Steerpike

Oh my I do remember those Daily Show episodes! I used to look forward to The Daily Show followed by The Colbert Report ...

Leslie

You're speaking narrowly about what was happening on TV shows ... that's not real life. Donald Trump did outrageous things to get attention --- then he got some attention. That doesn't translate into "the left was obsessed with him". The left wasn't "obsessed" with him until much later.

Leslie

Good stuff.

BritInParis

What’s your yardstick?

Steerpike

Hopefully the dems will find a way to 'brand' what they are aiming for - "Healthcare for all", '"Healthcare for more", "Single Payer Healthcare" ... none of which even begin to convey the point you are making - what you are talking about is AFFORDABLE healthcare. Hey - there's a thought ... Affordable Care ... where have I heard that before? Maybe "Affordable Care For All" - ACFA. Maybe we can have "SandersCare", "HarrisCare", "O'RourkeCare" ... or even, "KlobucharCare" ... or "AnyoneButTrumpCare".

Sadly, I think we have to separate 'what we want' from 'what we can get' - what we can realistically hope for. In some ways, the ACA (Affordable Care Act), aka 'Obamacare', was the 'best they could do' at the time. Obama clearly wanted single-payer but compromised to get the Insurance Companies on board, to reduce their resistance. Have times changed enough since then? 10 years or so have passed since then, and now the population is a bit more educated about what the issues are, what 'pre-existing conditions' really means, etc. But - has there been enough of a shift to overcome concerns (among swing voters in swing states, which is all that really matters) about the government 'taking over' healthcare, about higher taxes? I'm not convinced.

Clearly some are convinced - Zargof thinks we need bold proposals to entice the otherwise apathetic voters to show up and vote; I believe there's enough concern in the 'middle' that a proposal that is too bold will fail. I'd like to see us do everything we can to get more people insured, and to get the rates / costs down so people can actually USE the insurance they get. Does that require taking away what is already a 'successful/popular' (relatively speaking) option in the form of employer-provided group healthcare? I hope not because I think that would upset too many people - based on the statistics I posted a few pages ago. 2020 Election

civilservant

I read an article earlier in the week suggesting that the best model for the US would be the German model, since it incorporates public/private options that wouldn't mean putting an entire industry out of business.

Ingles

Can you not register as a "Independent" ?