Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

lawrencesummers

Igotadose wrote: »

What US is it that restricts education and health care to the rich? Not the one I grew up in. Not that it's equitable at all, and yeah, wealthy do better. But restricted, no.

Equitable to all, just more equitable to the rich and less equitable to the poor.

Igotadose

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Equitable to all, just more equitable to the rich and less equitable to the poor.

So we agree, not restricted. Thanks.

pixelburp

The question is not whether or not one ages with a reckoning recruits are "sucker" or the dead "losers", it's what it says to a country that the literal head of the Armed Forces - the so-called "Commander in Chief" - says this. Trump can think what he likes on his own time but as the man in charge there's a respect and dignity that should be afforded to those he sends to serve America's needs. How the men and women find themselves abroad or in graves is irrelevant - treating them with a modicum of respect is - once more - a baseline Trump cannot manage to reach.

Carfacemandog

Igotadose wrote: »

What US is it that restricts education and health care to the rich? Not the one I grew up in. Not that it's equitable at all, and yeah, wealthy do better. But restricted, no.

If you're poor (or even middle class) in the US without employment, I had figured it is pretty much a given that you have considerably less access the healthcare than those who can afford to pay the often exorbitant costs, or whose employers plans will typically cover much of the bill?

Timberrrrrrrr

lawrencesummers wrote: »

There is a world of difference between joining the military in a country that is constantly actively at war, and being a cop, fireman, Paramedic. A world of difference.

Us military deaths this year

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/12/30/new-in-2020-army-combat-casualties-trend-upwards-into-2020/

US firefighter deaths

https://apps.usfa.fema.gov/firefighter-fatalities/

Us police deaths

https://www.odmp.org/search/year/2020

From a quick glance more cops and firefighters have died this year in the line of duty than soldiers.

Igotadose

Carfacemandog wrote: »

If you're poor (or even middle class) in the US without employment, I had figured it is pretty much a given that you have considerably less access the healthcare than those who can afford to pay the often exorbitant costs, or whose employers plans will typically cover much of the bill?

Definitely not equitable. It's insurance based, which means it's based on your ability to pay. Poor get Medicaid, which is pretty minimal. Most are covered by an employer's plans, which will vary by employer. Some folks purchase their own insurance , via something like Obamacare or directly themselves, and what your policy covers, determines what you can get and how much you'll pay out of pocket. Seniors over 65 get Medicare, which is 'pretty good' coverage on the scale of things.

It really is a bad system, no one's restricted from it, if you're dying in the street and are poor you'll get trucked to the hospital and patched up whether you can pay or not.

And the prices are exorbitant, kind of eyewatering to look at.

Gbear

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Us military deaths this year

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/12/30/new-in-2020-army-combat-casualties-trend-upwards-into-2020/

US firefighter deaths

https://apps.usfa.fema.gov/firefighter-fatalities/

Us police deaths

https://www.odmp.org/search/year/2020

From a quick glance more cops and firefighters have died this year in the line of duty than soldiers.

It's worth noting that COVID has killed more police this year than all other sources combined.
I would imagine the numbers are similar for all other dangerous public service jobs.

It's something that the police unions should have probably taken note of before they decided to support Trump, but obviously being Trump's Brownshirts is more important to them than the lives of their members.

Carfacemandog

Igotadose wrote: »

Definitely not equitable. It's insurance based, which means it's based on your ability to pay. Poor get Medicaid, which is pretty minimal. Most are covered by an employer's plans, which will vary by employer. Some folks purchase their own insurance , via something like Obamacare or directly themselves, and what your policy covers, determines what you can get and how much you'll pay out of pocket. Seniors over 65 get Medicare, which is 'pretty good' coverage on the scale of things.

It really is a bad system, no one's restricted from it, if you're dying in the street and are poor you'll get trucked to the hospital and patched up whether you can pay or not.

And the prices are exorbitant, kind of eyewatering to look at.

That's the thing though, if they cannot be afforded then there is an accessibility issue. I do understand that if someone shows up in hospital with a bullet wound or similar that there is a duty of care which must be carried out, but in the example of someone with a degenerative/terminal illness or other issue such as mental health problems, and no employment, are they typically not just left to die slowly over time (perhaps with efforts made so save them under that same duty of care, if they happen to be caught in the minutes/hours between their final passing out and their actual time of officially dying)?

I would consider that to be quite restrictive, though I feel we may be using the word separately. For example, while I might not be officially restricted from some exclusive yacht club that costs €100,000/yr to be a member of, I still am for all intents and purposes as I do not make that much in a year even before tax.

ancapailldorcha

pixelburp wrote: »

The question is not whether or not one ages with a reckoning recruits are "sucker" or the dead "losers", it's what it says to a country that the literal head of the Armed Forces - the so-called "Commander in Chief" - says this. Trump can think what he likes on his own time but as the man in charge there's a respect and dignity that should be afforded to those he sends to serve America's needs. How the men and women find themselves abroad or in graces is irrelevant - treating them with a modicum of respect is - once more - a baseline Trump cannot manage to reach.

I'm in shock a bit about this. The one thing I know about US culture above all else is that the veterans are like the UK's NHS staff. You just do not say anything bad or negative about them ever.

I don't know how substantiated this is. Even with the likes of Romney you'd treat it with a mountain of salt but with Trump it's completely believable given how he mocked McCain in the 2016 primaries. The base will largely hold but I'd say anyone from a military family, service personnel and those who know soldiers will be thinking seriously about voting Democrat if they weren't before.

Timberrrrrrrr

I reckon there will be a new poll out shortly consisting of just military and their families, the results should be interesting to say the least.

lawrencesummers

pixelburp wrote: »

The question is not whether or not one ages with a reckoning recruits are "sucker" or the dead "losers", it's what it says to a country that the literal head of the Armed Forces - the so-called "Commander in Chief" - says this. Trump can think what he likes on his own time but as the man in charge there's a respect and dignity that should be afforded to those he sends to serve America's needs. How the men and women find themselves abroad or in graces is irrelevant - treating them with a modicum of respect is - once more - a baseline Trump cannot manage to reach.

An extension of the point im making, I agree with him. Joining the military has pros and cons, they vary from country to country and from time to time, but the cons of it far outweighs the benefits from my point of view.

It’s just that in American you don’t dare disparage the Military because of their (misguided) nationalistic love of all thing military.

But he has proven yet again to be unable to grasp the public opinion of something , it’s particularly funny as large portions of his support base are massively pro military

lawrencesummers

Igotadose wrote: »

So we agree, not restricted. Thanks.

Healthcare and education are not restricted, once you have the money to make it not restricted.

TomOnBoard

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm in shock a bit about this. The one thing I know about US culture above all else is that the veterans are like the UK's NHS staff. You just do not say anything bad or negative about them ever.

.

While you are correct in respect of today's US, it was the very opposite back in the time of the Vietnam war and for many years after. Veterans were treated appallingly in general, representing as they did the festering sore of US defeat in a war against a largely subsistence based "people in pajamas" on the other side of the world. On their return, they were spat upon and the wounded were reliant on a VA healthcare system that was 3rd World standard.

All this is relevant to how beliefs were formed and strengthened among those in power and wealth of Trump's generation and how a genuine belief that those people who served were 'losers' and worse. So it's understandable to me that he held those beliefs then, and avoided becoming one of the 'losers' just like countless of thousands of others including many who evaded the Draft. Some stayed and 'faced the music' honourably (like the great Muhammed Ali), others stole away to Canada but many took the Doctor's Cert route.

But that was then, and this is now! What anyone has a right to expect from a leader is that they will mature over time, that they will benefit from wisdom and experience and grow into their leadership role. That, after all, was the subtext that was trotted out in respect of Kavanaugh by many on the Right: "Yeah, sure! He may have been a beer sodden asshole in his teens, but he's a different person now!" In Trump's case, he never did grow! Hence, his saying the secret part out loud on these occasions. .. He was never suited for leadership, had few of the qualities of leadership and certainly didn't put on the mantle of leadership when, by a bizarre confluence of circumstances, he became a nation's leader and Commander in Chief of its Military.

I believe Trump said what was reported- his teenage bully brain is still working his mouth and isnt going to change now. But the environment that informed that bully brain did exist and no doubt millions of wealthy men in his age group felt the same way, but have developed more nuanced thinking as they grew, or if they didn't would at least have enough sense to not say that kind of **** out loud!

Leroy42

lawrencesummers wrote: »

An extension of the point im making, I agree with him. Joining the military has pros and cons, they vary from country to country and from time to time, but the cons of it far outweighs the benefits from my point of view.

It’s just that in American you don’t dare disparage the Military because of their (misguided) nationalistic love of all thing military.

But he has proven yet again to be unable to grasp the public opinion of something, it’s particularly funny as large portions of his support base are massively pro military

And that would be all well and good if he expressed those views. Instead, he wraps himself in the American flag, says how great the military are, attacks anyone that he thinks is not given 'our great troops' the respect they require and a major pillar of his policy has been increasing funding to the VA.

That he has also spent almost the entire time calling out generals "I know more than them", the likes of Mccain and other who were captured and even if he didn't say what he is accused off the fact remains that he didn't bother his hole to show up to pay the respects, on behalf of the country remember not just himself, because it was raining a bit, tells you al you need to know.

They will continue to argue whether he sais the exact words or not, to me that is a sideshow.

He was at that place as POTUS, to pays respects to the dead. He couldn't be arsed because it wasn't a nice day!

Quin_Dub

There is a huge difference being being anti-war or openly commenting on the futility of war and being disparaging about the Individuals.

If the discussion is around "What was the point of all these wars?" or "What did we get in return for the sacrifices made by these people?" , those are reasonable positions to hold and ones that I personally would be in agreement with.

BUT - Calling the individual soldiers that were killed/wounded losers and suckers for doing what they saw as their duty is simply out of bounds.

It shows a distinct lack of common decency and empathy - Both things that Trump has been accused of repeatedly throughout his life.

lawrencesummers

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Us military deaths this year

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/12/30/new-in-2020-army-combat-casualties-trend-upwards-into-2020/

US firefighter deaths

https://apps.usfa.fema.gov/firefighter-fatalities/

Us police deaths

https://www.odmp.org/search/year/2020

From a quick glance more cops and firefighters have died this year in the line of duty than soldiers.

Pointless quoting one years figures. Look at it over a few decades if you want a true reflection and Then remember that it doesn’t take into account the vast number of people with physical and mental implications from military service. Some would say there are worse things than dying. I say don’t go near either.

Igotadose

Carfacemandog wrote: »

That's the thing though, if they cannot be afforded then there is an accessibility issue. I do understand that if someone shows up in hospital with a bullet wound or similar that there is a duty of care which must be carried out, but in the example of someone with a degenerative/terminal illness or other issue such as mental health problems, and no employment, are they typically not just left to die slowly over time (perhaps with efforts made so save them under that same duty of care, if they happen to be caught in the minutes/hours between their final passing out and their actual time of officially dying)?

I would consider that to be quite restrictive, though I feel we may be using the word separately. For example, while I might not be officially restricted from some exclusive yacht club that costs €100,000/yr to be a member of, I still am for all intents and purposes as I do not make that much in a year even before tax.

As with all US healthcare discussions, it's complicated. My first Dr. in Ireland who had worked at Cedars-Sinai in LA, a very prominent hospital, summarized it: "US healthcare is bonkers."

It always comes down to your insurance coverage. If you're destitute, you're eligible for MediCAID - my emphasis for discussion, not spelled that way. There's an income level you can google for Medicaid, and your assets matter so, for example you can own a car and a house and still be eligible, but not too much liquid assets, $5k total in cash or something ridiculous like that.

Medicaid covers mental illness, long-term conditions like cancer, etc. But, you'll get what I think of as the "HSE level" of care - barely competent and nothing you'd really want to pay for directly out of pocket. You can go to your own doctor if he/she takes Medicaid, a lot do in urban and rural areas as its all the locals have.

After you exceed the Medicaid income level, then you're more or less on your own; pay out of pocket, get insurance through an employer, through the PPACA, buy your own insurance, or pay for your treatment yourself. This will be the case until you are 65 when MediCARE (my emphasis) kicks in. It's generally very popular and gets seniors a pretty good level of care. In areas with high concentrations of seniors (Florida, Arizona, Carolinas), its the primary medical insurer.

There are physicians that take no insurance as payment at all. You pay them, usually annually, a fee to access the doctors in their practice. When I lived in NYC this was a thing, the wealthy definitely used them, and good luck getting into one even if you could afford it, kind of like your yacht club.

So, you see, my Kerry doctor was spot on. Bonkers.

I won't bore everyone with the complexities of insurance and prescription drugs, it's bonkers too. And staggeringly expensive, unless your insurance covers it.

Quin_Dub

lawrencesummers wrote: »

Pointless quoting one years figures. Look at it over a few decades if you want a true reflection and Then remember that it doesn’t take into account the vast number of people with physical and mental implications from military service. Some would say there are worse things than dying. I say don’t go near either.

Look - I see where you are coming from in some ways - The Military is not a career I'd choose for myself ,nor would I be thrilled if my children chose that path - particularly in a Military as likely to get into a shooting war as the US armed forces.

However , that doesn't mean that I wouldn't have respect for someone that made that choice for themselves , nor does it mean I'd call them "suckers & losers" for getting killed or wounded.

I'd hold the politicians that sent them responsible , not the soldiers themselves.

I have spent a lot of time in the Southern United States over the last 20+ years that the respect that military service holds among the average people on the street is incredible. Every single Hotel, Restaurant & Shop has discounts and special service reserved for Active Military and Veterans all the time.

Every time I see someone walking around in uniform , nearly every US person they pass will pause and say "Thank you for your Service" unprompted.

Those same people will rail against "Washington" and indeed Foreign wars , but not for a single moment do they hold the front line troops in any way responsible for those wars.

This has the potential to be incredibly damaging to Trump.

The Nal

TomOnBoard wrote: »

While you are correct in respect of today's US, it was the very opposite back in the time of the Vietnam war and for many years after. Veterans were treated appallingly in general, representing as they did the festering sore of US defeat in a war against a largely subsistence based "people in pajamas" on the other side of the world. On their return, they were spat upon and the wounded were reliant on a VA healthcare system that was 3rd World standard.

America has basically lost the last 3 of the last 4 wars they've been involved in. Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. Somalia under Clinton was a spectacular failure too.

No soldiers, no wars. Simplistic but true.

I've no issue with Trump dodging the draft or whatever way he did it. Smart move. He does appear to be very anti war which is good.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I have spent a lot of time in the Southern United States over the last 20+ years that the respect that military service holds among the average people on the street is incredible. Every single Hotel, Restaurant & Shop has discounts and special service reserved for Active Military and Veterans all the time.

There are loads of them begging on the streets. San Francisco is like a zombie army apocalypse. Homeless veterans with only the shirt on their backs lying face down on the concrete, piss all over them, drunk and high, filthy, getting moved on by the police etc. Awful stuff.

Also saw a lot of "official" beggars in Nashville. ie they have a military card that basically allows them to beg.

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I'd hold the politicians that sent them responsible , not the soldiers themselves.

Soldiers need to take responsibility, as do their parents.

Gbear

The Nal wrote: »

I've no issue with Trump dodging the draft or whatever way he did it. Smart move. He does appear to be very anti war which is good.

If he was anti-war, he probably shouldn't have destroyed the single most important piece of anti-war foreign policy in the last 30 years in the Iran Nuclear Deal then, and shouldn't have also then committed an act of war against that same country by assassinating one of their most senior military leaders.

He probably shouldn't have appointed a violent psychopath like John Bolton as his National Security Advisor either.

pixelburp

Trump is not "anti war", that's simply nonsense. Just as a single example here he is responding to NK sabre rattling; not even remotely the rhetoric, diction or posture of someone actively trying to avoid war. Or even basic geopolitical escalation. That's a threat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p1JIgTuKQk

lawrencesummers

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Look - I see where you are coming from in some ways - The Military is not a career I'd choose for myself ,nor would I be thrilled if my children chose that path - particularly in a Military as likely to get into a shooting war as the US armed forces.

However , that doesn't mean that I wouldn't have respect for someone that made that choice for themselves , nor does it mean I'd call them "suckers & losers" for getting killed or wounded.

I'd hold the politicians that sent them responsible , not the soldiers themselves.

I have spent a lot of time in the Southern United States over the last 20+ years that the respect that military service holds among the average people on the street is incredible. Every single Hotel, Restaurant & Shop has discounts and special service reserved for Active Military and Veterans all the time.

Every time I see someone walking around in uniform , nearly every US person they pass will pause and say "Thank you for your Service" unprompted.

Those same people will rail against "Washington" and indeed Foreign wars , but not for a single moment do they hold the front line troops in any way responsible for those wars.

This has the potential to be incredibly damaging to Trump.

I wouldn’t be calling anybody suckers or losers either, but I would be thinking it, I think people who join the military in the US are idiots, but because of the way society is structured in the US I can understand why they choose it as a career path, a lot of them have no choice, or it’s the best of the bad options they have.

Personally I would share my opinion on it with Arthur McBride to be honest.“ All hazards and dangers we barter on chance”


Hopefully it is damaging to Trump, it’s just a pity that only now because of this people who once supported him are changing their minds when it should have happened long long ago.

lawrencesummers

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I reckon there will be a new poll out shortly consisting of just military and their families, the results should be interesting to say the least.

Im sure there was one out recently before this was reported that had him trailing Biden by a few points.

Quin_Dub

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There is a huge difference being being anti-war or openly commenting on the futility of war and being disparaging about the Individuals.

If the discussion is around "What was the point of all these wars?"

From the Commander-in-Chief himself:

People don’t realize, … the U.S. Civil War – if you think about it, why?

The Nal

pixelburp wrote: »

Trump is not "anti war", that's simply nonsense. Just as a single example here he is responding to NK sabre rattling; not even remotely the rhetoric, diction or posture of someone actively trying to avoid war. Or even basic geopolitical escalation. That's a threat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p1JIgTuKQk

And 18 months later...



Smart from Trump. Words are fine. Scare the bejesus out of them with words. Fairly historical stuff there.

Leroy42

The Nal wrote: »

And 18 months later...



Smart from Trump. Words are fine. Scare the bejesus out of them with words. Fairly historical stuff there.

He didn't scare anyone.

What did this achieve, apart from a great PR opportunity for KJU and NK?

They still have nuclear weapons, continue to missile test. They haven't changed one thing. Trump achieved nothing for the US.

lawrencesummers

Leroy42 wrote: »

He didn't scare anyone.

What did this achieve, apart from a great PR opportunity for KJU and NK?

They still have nuclear weapons, continue to missile test. They haven't changed one thing. Trump achieved nothing for the US.

A photo op with the only world leader in worse physical condition than himself?

duploelabs

More from the grift report....

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-took-art-us-ambassador-france-home-canceling-wwi-event-2020-9?r=US&IR=T

President Donald Trump took home $750,000 worth of art from the home of the US ambassador to France during the 2018 visit where he canceled a journey to visit American World War I dead

pixelburp

The Nal wrote: »

And 18 months later...

[...]

Smart from Trump. Words are fine. Scare the bejesus out of them with words. Fairly historical stuff there.

Sorry, but that doesn't pass any kind of sensible smell test; you can't call someone "Anti war" when their rhetoric is intentionally hostile to the point of apocalyptic in response. Never-mind "anti war" it's not even the words of hardened diplomacy.

It was Teddy Roosevelt who coined the phrase "speak softly and carry a big stick", whereas this was more "speak like a paper tiger and carry out no action". What was achieved from this summit? Nothing of substance, bar a photo-op - unless you can point at something specific?

I mean, according to the UN, N. Korea are likely still pursuing their nuclear dreams so ... again, what did it gain beyond make Trump look like a violent spoofer?

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/04/asia/un-north-korea-nukes-report-intl/index.html

United Nations (CNN)North Korea is continuing work on its nuclear program and several countries believe Pyongyang has made gains in producing ballistic missiles with small nuclear devices attached, according to a confidential United Nations (UN) report, a UN diplomat told CNN.

The latest report was prepared by a UN-appointed independent panel of experts, who are charged with monitoring sanctions enforcement and efficacy. It says the unnamed countries believe North Korea "probably developed miniaturized nuclear devices to fit into the warheads of its ballistic missiles."
[...]

A UN report last year concluded North Korea generated around $2 billion using cyberattacks to plunder banks and cryptocurrency exchanges. The summary of that report indicated North Korea is probing Security Council countries in cyberattacks.

North Korea played Trump. A man notorious for having no follow-through or patience for detail. He got his photo-op and got to declare Victory. All NK had to do is wait a week.

The Raging Bile Duct

The Nal wrote: »

And 18 months later...



Smart from Trump. Words are fine. Scare the bejesus out of them with words. Fairly historical stuff there.

Two Years Later…

North Korea on Friday said it was abandoning attempts to pursue a diplomatic relationship with the White House because two years after a historic handshake between President Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un "even a slim ray of optimism" for peace and prosperity on the Korean peninsula had "faded away into a dark nightmare."

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2020/06/12/north-korea-diplomacy-trump-has-failed-boost-nuclear-program/3174457001/