BEVS

I'd sadly go along with that . Before the Trump thing , I wouldn't have thought it could be so . It seems the beating heart of the USA is not all inclusive of all its peoples.

Reparation is a very difficult issue. One which New Zealand has been dealing with for many many decades now.

Social welfare and healthcare should of course be for everyone in this day and age & it certainly should not be employer/ins company dependant, however I can quite see those that have cover begrudging the have nots if it means it costs the individual more. Many wish to live within societies but don't want to pay to make societies work well for all.

Ingles

Fox New's has a "pop" @ Donny over the conditions the poor kids are confined in.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-ne...isoners-of-war

Will Donny call it "Fake News" ?

johnwoo

I think Native Americans and African Americans are a case apart. Adding other groups that have been treated badly are just a red herring.
Reparations are not handing a check to everyone concerned, but racism is deep rooted and exists to this day, with disproportionate incarceration and the list is a long one. Is this not due to race or are African Americans just a bad lot and it's all their own fault.

johnwoo

Your second post cancelled out your first, or is it the other way round. I guess if you make contradictory posts one of them may be right?

scrubbedexpat099

I would think The Chinese Exclusion Act was an even more compelling situation, the Chinese in some cases were treated even worse than slaves and many were expelled. Slaves had a value, indentured labourers did not and were replaced for free.

johnwoo

Reparations or to right a wrong that still exists to a large extent today?
Reparations are not just about slavery.

scrubbedexpat099

That was my point.It is not just about slavery.

civilservant

Boomhauer

Agree. And I like to add that if Germany can make reparations to victims of the Holocaust and to Allied nations, then why shouldn't the US act in kind ?

Lion in Winter

Treaties with Native Americans have been broken repeatedly and are still being broken today. Stopping that practice might be a good start. There is a huge blind spot on this in the US.

scrubbedexpat099

Contractors in 18 States, Including CA, Got $300M by Claiming to Be Cherokee Despite White Ancestry

https://ktla.com/2019/06/26/contract...hite-ancestry/

This sort of combines both issues, can not believe it is uncommon.

civilservant

i may not like all of Warrens policies (and I don't) but I really like her as a person. She really believes what she's saying it appears, which makes a change for a politician.

robtuck

Thus far I quite like Warren and Harris. Warren seems a person of conviction and given the potential wreck she could have had given her strange Native American thing, she seems to rise above it well, unlike Clinton who seemed to come across as belittling everyone. Harris would be my choice to take on Trump if I had any vested interest, for fun more than anything. I don't know much about her policy positions but she strikes me as able to make someone else look silly without looking like nasty know it all, again a Clinton failing from what I saw.

Warren's biggest issue is she has a strong point on Healthcare, but seems determined to just stamp all over private healthcare. We all know the USA mind is a tough one to budge on Universal Healthcare as it is, but they keep ignoring that healthy Private industries survive still in countries like the UK. They'd do well to position it as a Basic Human Right Care with the option of Private Top-Ups. Everyone can carry on as is if they like, but you'd expect the Private Top Up to reduce in price as the Taxation covered portion of Healthcare will reduce the burden on Insurers.

Now, stamping over the Drug pricing,that one will likely go down well, so they can after that.

Steerpike

Is Harris' position any different from Warren's on Healthcare? Has she taken a less strong position on the elimination of private insurance? I'm with you in that I see the complete elimination of private insurance as a hard sell to the American public (just wait till the ads start ...!) I'm in favor of an 'opt-in' plan, whereby anyone who wishes can 'opt in' to Medicare. So it's 'Medicare For All' "if you want it". Now, in fairness to these politicians proposing elimination, I believe their reasoning is, they have to 'grab' the entire market in order to make it financially feasible. If they only take on those who are currently not benefiting from employer-provided 'group' coverage - a demographic that is likely older and sicker than the average - then the relative cost-per-patient will be substantially higher. They 'need' the young and healthy in the mix to balance out the costs.

Harris remains my preference and yes, I think she more than anyone could take on Trump verbally and do him harm.

robtuck

Assuming you layer into some form of taxation, if everyone decided to keep their Private as was, then the cost would actually be split quite well - some people essentially paying twice for their healthcare coverage. Everyone pays a small amount for the Basic universal cover, even if they also have Private - that can either be direct on the employee/self employed, or you can take some via companies and they'd automatically reduce their own provision anyway. If you grapple drug costs at the same time, the net cost to anyone with Insurance today will unlikely increase - if I remember correctly the USA spends double what the UK does on healthcare all rolled-up, mostly due to the NHS purchasing power over drug companies.