4 ms·

> why not demonstrate it works in a few test states It's tough to do some things at the state level because there's less money at the state level vs the federa

by rtkwe 6y ago

> why not demonstrate it works in a few test states It's tough to do some things at the state level because there's less money at the state level vs the federal level. It's a lot easier for a business to move from a state to avoid taxes meant to pay for healthcare by rerouting fund from the private market to the public market than it is to leave the US entirely. The federal government gets it's taxes first from income taxes then payroll taxes, I checked a couple states and most are income then sales/use tax which is a big difference. Not being able to reroute money from employer based systems into the single payer system is a huge hole in any state level attempt at single payer. Also just having more people means a federal level system will have more bargaining power than even the largest states.

rtkwe 6y ago
As for the etymology of woke I'm no linguist but it seems to flow pretty clearly from the idea of being awake to a problem. The particular slang is just from AAVE, not sure it's possible to trace where the different conjugation started from. > "I been sleeping all my life. And now that Mr. Garvey done woke me up, I'm gon' stay woke. And I'm gon help him wake up other black folk." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke
AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
> there's less money at the state level vs the federal level So if anything, it means to me that we need to work on increasing roles of individual states and decreasing federal powers.
- rtkwe 6y ago
  That's more of a question of where you come down on the idea of federalism. Personally I think way more stuff makes sense to have created and funded uniformly across the country than fragmented. The biggest budget sinks at the federal level of military and entitlement programs like social security make sense to be there. The military for obvious reasons makes more sense to have funded from there and then social security et al as well because people often move from where they were working to where they retire so trying to fund that at the state level get's a bit dicey for moving the money to where the old people actually are.

by rtkwe 6y ago

rtkwe 6y ago

As for the etymology of woke I'm no linguist but it seems to flow pretty clearly from the idea of being awake to a problem. The particular slang is just from AAVE, not sure it's possible to trace where the different conjugation started from. > "I been sleeping all my life. And now that Mr. Garvey done woke me up, I'm gon' stay woke. And I'm gon help him wake up other black folk." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

AlexTWithBeard 6y ago

> there's less money at the state level vs the federal level So if anything, it means to me that we need to work on increasing roles of individual states and decreasing federal powers.

rtkwe 6y ago
That's more of a question of where you come down on the idea of federalism. Personally I think way more stuff makes sense to have created and funded uniformly across the country than fragmented. The biggest budget sinks at the federal level of military and entitlement programs like social security make sense to be there. The military for obvious reasons makes more sense to have funded from there and then social security et al as well because people often move from where they were working to where they retire so trying to fund that at the state level get's a bit dicey for moving the money to where the old people actually are.