3 ms·

>Inequality is deeply problematic and there are no easy solutions. Liberalism recognizes this. No, it doesn't. The article points this out very eloquently. B

>Inequality is deeply problematic and there are no easy solutions. Liberalism recognizes this. No, it doesn't. The article points this out very eloquently. Bernie Sanders recognizes it, but he doesn't speak for most liberals, who are all excited to vote for Hillary and Goldman Sachs. (And before anyone downvotes me for directly bashing a political candidate, go read the article; I'm just repeating what the article says. Don't like it, downvote the whole article.) >We don't see our own sense of entitlement. It is transparent to others despite our liberal signaling. This isn't going to be a pretty ride. This is absolutely right. As the article says, this is exactly why Trump is so popular right now: he's playing directly to the working class that's lucky to get a job lifting boxes without health insurance. The mainline Democrats are not: they're telling everyone how wonderful the economy is, how unemployment is at record-low levels, how wonderful Obamacare is, etc. All those platitudes aren't helping actual working-class people at all, and they're not seeing any of these benefits.

ZeroGravitas 11y ago
I'm an outsider to this, but Obamacare seems like a tentative half-step towards a sane healthcare system like the rest of the developed world has. And as far as I can tell the only reason it's a half-step is because the red-tribe has been convinced for decades that it would help African Americans and so voted for people who worked against it. Trump could be seen as these red-tribe members realising they'd been duped, but it could also be seen as the Republicans losing control of the racism they cultivated to win those votes in the past.
- kombucha2 11y ago
  To me it felt like a complete betrayal of what most people, who were for it, wanted. Most people I know regard it as a failure or at best a mess. I know I certainly had a very different system in mind. I will say that it seems to have benefited some however.
  - Grishnakh 11y ago
    It seems to have helped some lower-income people in some states get coverage they couldn't afford otherwise, with the downside that everyone else's insurance rates have skyrocketed and the insurance companies have had record profits. The whole thing was a stupid idea by a right-wing thinktank. It tries to help by establishing a cap on profits and spreading the costs around by requiring everyone to be insured, but it depended on states increasing their Medicaid eligibility, which red states did not. It did nothing to actually decrease the cost of care. I consider it a mess, not a complete failure. The problem is that we only have one candidate who's serious about fixing the situation, and it's unlikely he's going to get his party's nomination. His competitor thinks this system is wonderful and defends it. On the other side, one guy wants to repeal it altogether and just screw over anyone who can't afford insurance, and with the other guy no one really knows what he's going to do because he keeps changing his position, though he did say something in favor of universal healthcare a while back, but his current website has switched to some standard lame Republican ideas about letting insurance companies compete over state lines, so they'll all just move to the least-regulated state like Wyoming.
- eli_gottlieb 11y ago
  >I'm an outsider to this, but Obamacare seems like a tentative half-step towards a sane healthcare system like the rest of the developed world has. And as far as I can tell the only reason it's a half-step is because the red-tribe has been convinced for decades that it would help African Americans and so voted for people who worked against it. Nope. The deciding vote against a public health-care option was Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut and well-graduated meritocrat from Yale Law.

ZeroGravitas 11y ago

I'm an outsider to this, but Obamacare seems like a tentative half-step towards a sane healthcare system like the rest of the developed world has. And as far as I can tell the only reason it's a half-step is because the red-tribe has been convinced for decades that it would help African Americans and so voted for people who worked against it. Trump could be seen as these red-tribe members realising they'd been duped, but it could also be seen as the Republicans losing control of the racism they cultivated to win those votes in the past.

kombucha2 11y ago
To me it felt like a complete betrayal of what most people, who were for it, wanted. Most people I know regard it as a failure or at best a mess. I know I certainly had a very different system in mind. I will say that it seems to have benefited some however.
- Grishnakh 11y ago
  It seems to have helped some lower-income people in some states get coverage they couldn't afford otherwise, with the downside that everyone else's insurance rates have skyrocketed and the insurance companies have had record profits. The whole thing was a stupid idea by a right-wing thinktank. It tries to help by establishing a cap on profits and spreading the costs around by requiring everyone to be insured, but it depended on states increasing their Medicaid eligibility, which red states did not. It did nothing to actually decrease the cost of care. I consider it a mess, not a complete failure. The problem is that we only have one candidate who's serious about fixing the situation, and it's unlikely he's going to get his party's nomination. His competitor thinks this system is wonderful and defends it. On the other side, one guy wants to repeal it altogether and just screw over anyone who can't afford insurance, and with the other guy no one really knows what he's going to do because he keeps changing his position, though he did say something in favor of universal healthcare a while back, but his current website has switched to some standard lame Republican ideas about letting insurance companies compete over state lines, so they'll all just move to the least-regulated state like Wyoming.
eli_gottlieb 11y ago
>I'm an outsider to this, but Obamacare seems like a tentative half-step towards a sane healthcare system like the rest of the developed world has. And as far as I can tell the only reason it's a half-step is because the red-tribe has been convinced for decades that it would help African Americans and so voted for people who worked against it. Nope. The deciding vote against a public health-care option was Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut and well-graduated meritocrat from Yale Law.