Support NeoGAF

[Basileus777]

And for everyone who isn't in a union? They just lose out on compensation then? This is absolutely something that needs to be dealt with at the legislative level.

But how? The connection between employment and health insurance needs to be loosened/severed, but I don't see how the federal government is going to be able to legislate wage increases in compensation. The market will need to bear that out.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Well here's a terrifying fucking piece from Jeet Heer

https://newrepublic.com/article/144...hite-house-never-rid-trump-represents-america

Trump is 71, overweight, doesn't sleep, and is in a blinding rage seemingly 24/7. I just can't imagine him not having a heart attack in the next few years.

Then again Dick Cheney seems to be ticking on a steady diet of evil and heart replacements so who knows?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Well here's a terrifying fucking piece from Jeet Heer

https://newrepublic.com/article/144...hite-house-never-rid-trump-represents-america

There's no way Trump's heart is lasting 15 more years though.

 

[B-Dubs]

But how? The connection between employment and health insurance needs to be loosened/severed, but I don't see how the federal government is going to be able to legislate wage increases in compensation. The market will need to bear that out.

Individual companies will never give that money to employees, they'll just use it to pad their bottom line. Maybe one or two will do it for the good press, but it'll never be a widespread thing without legislating it. Put a line in the law that says "Any saving a company makes by not spending on health insurance for it's employees is to go to said employees are an increase in wages." Or something.

The fact is if you don't do something like this you'll be attacked with "So-and-so wants to slash your wages and raise your taxes" and you won't be able to argue against it because there will be some truth there.

If you can't make sure employees are going to be fairly compensated by their employers for the loss of their insurance then you're handing the opposition a silver bullet, loading the gun, and pointing it at your heart.

 

[Futurevoid]

Paul Ryan this morning was going on about a clean DACA bill not being a possibility and that the Congress would need to address border security concerns and that the Presiden....oh.

Kaitlan Collins‏Verified account @kaitlancollins 4m4 minutes ago
More
Trump told House members that funding for the border wall doesn't need to be tied to a DACA fix, Rep. Cuellar tells reporters after meeting.

 

[Grexeno]

Individual companies will never give that money to employees, they'll just use it to pad their bottom line. Maybe one or two will do it for the good press, but it'll never be a widespread thing without legislating it. Put a line in the law that says "Any saving a company makes by not spending on health insurance for it's employees is to go to said employees are an increase in wages." Or something.

The fact is if you don't do something like this you'll be attacked with "So-and-so wants to slash your wages and raise your taxes" and you won't be able to argue against it because there will be some truth there.

If you can't make sure employees are going to be fairly compensated by their employers for the loss of their insurance then you're handing the opposition a silver bullet, loading the gun, and pointing it at your heart.

Also good luck getting that past the courts.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Individual companies will never give that money to employees, they'll just use it to pad their bottom line. Maybe one or two will do it for the good press, but it'll never be a widespread thing without legislating it. Put a line in the law that says "Any saving a company makes by not spending on health insurance for it's employees is to go to said employees are an increase in wages." Or something.

The fact is if you don't do something like this you'll be attacked with "So-and-so wants to slash your wages and raise your taxes" and you won't be able to argue against it because there will be some truth there.

If you can't make sure employees are going to be fairly compensated by their employers for the loss of their insurance then you're handing the opposition a silver bullet, loading the gun, and pointing it at your heart.

can it be court challenged?

 

[B-Dubs]

Also good luck getting that past the courts.

This is why the whole thing is beyond complicated. There's no easy answers here. If you leave things to the market you hand the opposition a silver bullet, if you try and legislate it then you probably lose in the courts. There's no clean answers here, but the fact is we need a way to deal with the issue regardless.

can it be court challenged?

More than likely, I assume.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Paul Ryan this morning was going on about a clean DACA bill not being a possibility and that the Congress would need to address border security concerns and that the Presiden....oh.

I don't get why Trump just doesn't lie and say he's already built the wall. His dumbass followers will believe anything he says right?

 

[studyguy]

Hispanic Heritage Month proclaimed by Trump.

Pres. Trump proclaims National Hispanic Heritage Month: Hispanic Americans are "a testament to the American promise" that all can succeed.

 

[ShadowSwordmaster]

That seems odd.

 

[BoogieWoogie]

Are there any other heritage months that start in the middle of one month then end in the middle of another?

 

[Random Human]

^ Expect a leak from annoymous White House sources that this was Ivanka's idea.

 

[benicillin]

Hahaha why does it run from mid-Sept to mid-Oct!

Someone probably gave him this idea and he literally couldn't wait.

 

[Suikoguy]

His low approval rating is getting to him, it's the most likely explanation for recent developments.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

And for everyone who isn't in a union? They just lose out on compensation then? This is absolutely something that needs to be dealt with at the legislative level.

The bill simply says that private insurance can't replicate government provisions. If what unionized employers have is better than what would be provided by the government under the proposed system, then they would continue to get that, since the government would not take that part away.

 

[benicillin]

Wait it was already a month?

National Hispanic Heritage Month is the period from September 15 to October 15 in the United States, when people recognize the contributions of Hispanic and Latino Americans to the group's heritage and culture.

Hispanic Heritage Week was established by legislation sponsored by Rep. Edward R. Roybal (D-Los Angeles) and first proclaimed President Lyndon Johnson in 1968.[1][2] The commemorative week was expanded by legislation sponsored by Rep. Esteban E. Torres (D-Pico Rivera) and implemented by President Ronald Reagan in 1988 to cover a 30-day period (September 15 - October 15).[1] It was enacted into law on August 17, 1988 on the approval of Public Law 100-402.

September 15 was chosen as the starting point for the celebration because it is the anniversary of independence of five Latin American countries: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. All declared independence in 1821.

Is he just...redoing it?

 

[Armaros]

His low approval rating is getting to him, it's the most likely explanation for recent developments.

He is already addicted to the positive coverage of his debt ceiling 'deal'

 

[Fenderputty]

One does not ask the leopard to change his spots, nor the shitposter his shitposts

I laughed at this more than I should have. Not that it's not funny I just laughed a lot.

Paul Ryan this morning was going on about a clean DACA bill not being a possibility and that the Congress would need to address border security concerns and that the Presiden....oh.

You gotta be shittin' me.

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

The clear answer is that the bill should also change collective bargaining to sector-level instead of company-level so that workers can receive the fruits of their labor.

 

[Plinko]

When I read Bernie Sanders' "answers" to budget questions in that Vox interview, I can't help but think he sounds identical to Trump during the campaign.

 

[studyguy]

Right that was part of the issue, from the proclamation it sounds like he's announcing the creation of the month when it already existed.

 

[Basileus777]

Individual companies will never give that money to employees, they'll just use it to pad their bottom line. Maybe one or two will do it for the good press, but it'll never be a widespread thing without legislating it. Put a line in the law that says "Any saving a company makes by not spending on health insurance for it's employees is to go to said employees are an increase in wages." Or something.

The fact is if you don't do something like this you'll be attacked with "So-and-so wants to slash your wages and raise your taxes" and you won't be able to argue against it because there will be some truth there.

If you can't make sure employees are going to be fairly compensated by their employers for the loss of their insurance then you're handing the opposition a silver bullet, loading the gun, and pointing it at your heart.

This is really vague and I'm seeing how any of this would work in a bill. Beyond setting the minimum wage, the federal government doesn't really have the ability to determine how private employees are paid. This is why unions are important!

 

[Futurevoid]

After killing the fillibuster for Gorsuch, Mitch wants to weaken the blue slips to nothing more than an advisory as to how a Senator will vote for judicial appointments.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/us/politics/mcconnell-federal-judges-trump.html

Now, with some Democrats refusing to consent as the Trump administration moves to fill scores of judicial vacancies, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Kentucky Republican and majority leader, is for the first time publicly advocating that the blue slip be made strictly advisory when it comes to appeals court nominees — the most powerful judges after those on the Supreme Court.

“My personal view is that the blue slip, with regard to circuit court appointments, ought to simply be a notification of how you’re going to vote, not the opportunity to blackball,” Mr. McConnell said in an interview with The New York Times for “The New Washington” podcast. He said he favored retaining the blue slip authority for lower-level district court judges.

But the blue slip practice — which is not a Senate rule but the prerogative of the Judiciary Committee chairman — remained in place. Because Democrats abided by it during Barack Obama’s presidency and Republicans refused to sign off on many of his nominees, his tenure ended with a large number of court openings that the Trump White House can now fill if it can overcome Democratic objections.

At the moment, there are 144 federal court vacancies, including 21 on the appeals courts and 115 at the district court level. Besides Justice Gorsuch, Mr. Trump has won the confirmation of three appeals court judges and two district judges. Forty-five nominations are pending — 11 for the appeals courts, and 34 at the district level.

 

[whyamihere]

After killing the fillibuster for Gorsuch, Mitch wants to weaken the blue slips to nothing more than an advisory as to how a Senator will vote for judicial appointments.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/us/politics/mcconnell-federal-judges-trump.html

of course.

Either codify the norms or we should stop following them.

 

[Plinko]

This is amazingly bad. I don't understand how these guys continue to come up with the worst possible plans available.

 

[benicillin]

When I read Bernie Sanders' "answers" to budget questions in that Vox interview, I can't help but think he sounds identical to Trump during the campaign.

This is kind of absurd. Bernie knows a hell of a lot more of what he's talking about than Trump does.

 

[Basileus777]

After killing the fillibuster for Gorsuch, Mitch wants to weaken the blue slips to nothing more than an advisory as to how a Senator will vote for judicial appointments.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/us/politics/mcconnell-federal-judges-trump.html

Blue slips are ridiculous. Mitch disregarding them is fine, it's the Democrats who should be ashamed for giving them credence.

 

[Plinko]

This is kind of absurd. Bernie knows a hell of a lot more of what he's talking about than Trump does.

Is it absurd when comparing how much he ignores actual policy questions, though? Trump was a master at hand-waving during the campaign, and Bernie does it pretty much all throughout that interview.

 

[Scirrocco]

Trump is 71, overweight, doesn't sleep, and is in a blinding rage seemingly 24/7. I just can't imagine him not having a heart attack in the next few years.

Then again Dick Cheney seems to be ticking on a steady diet of evil and heart replacements so who knows?

I don't know about the rage part. One of the benefits of being a delusional narcissist is your usually in a good mood. I'm sure he can get pretty heated when things go wrong, but then he just reminds himself that he's the greatest , smartest, bigly handedest person who ever lived and it's all going to work out fine, and he calms down.

That alone probably gets him to survive the next four years sadly.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I don't know about the rage part. One of the benefits of being a delusional narcissist is your usually in a good mood. I'm sure he can get pretty heated when things go wrong, but then he just reminds himself that he's the greatest , smartest, bigly handedest person who ever lived and it's all going to work out fine, and he calms down.

That alone probably gets him to survive the next four years sadly.

If the reports are accurate, he's not a happy guy most of the time.

 

[chadskin]

The UNMASKING SCANDAL is going pretty terrible for Republicans

Former national security adviser Susan Rice privately told House investigators that she unmasked the identities of senior Trump officials to understand why the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates was in New York late last year, multiple sources told CNN.

The New York meeting preceded a separate effort by the UAE to facilitate a back-channel communication between Russia and the incoming Trump White House.

The crown prince, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, arrived in New York last December in the transition period before Trump was sworn into office for a meeting with several top Trump officials, including Michael Flynn, the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his top strategist Steve Bannon, sources said.

Rice's previously undisclosed revelation in a classified setting shines new light on a practice that had come under sharp criticism from the committee chairman, California Rep. Devin Nunes, and President Donald Trump, who previously accused Rice of committing a crime.

But her explanation appears to have satisfied some influential Republicans on the committee, undercutting both Nunes and Trump and raising new questions about whether any Trump associates tried to arrange back-channel discussions with the Russians.

"I didn't hear anything to believe that she did anything illegal," Florida Rep. Tom Rooney, a Republican helping to lead the panel's Russia invesigation, told CNN of Rice's testimony. He declined to discuss any of the contents of her classified remarks.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/13/p...stigators-unmasked-trump-officials/index.html

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

I don't know about the rage part. One of the benefits of being a delusional narcissist is your usually in a good mood. I'm sure he can get pretty heated when things go wrong, but then he just reminds himself that he's the greatest , smartest, bigly handedest person who ever lived and it's all going to work out fine, and he calms down.

That alone probably gets him to survive the next four years sadly.

He watches alot of MSNBC and CNN, and it pisses him off.

 

[wutwutwut]

Is it absurd when comparing how much he ignores actual policy questions, though? Trump was a master at hand-waving during the campaign, and Bernie does it pretty much all throughout that interview.

No, the comparison is eerily accurate, down to the rabid fanbases. Bernie's main redeeming feature over Trump is that (a) his heart is in the right place and (b) his ideas, while unsound, are not that far away from ideas that are both good and sound.

Spoiler

save us Hillary

 

[AntraxSuicide]

The bill simply says that private insurance can't replicate government provisions. If what unionized employers have is better than what would be provided by the government under the proposed system, then they would continue to get that, since the government would not take that part away.

That's not what they were saying. The question was what happens to the negotiated health care of union workers (where their payments are effectively wages that get taken before workers see them). The proposed solution was to leave it up to the union to just get that money redistributed back into their salaries, but this wouldn't help non-union workers who would presumably get nothing from the savings.

I'd honestly just go for it and try to mandate that an employee's contribution to health care be paid out to them. Maybe it'll get challenged in court, but honestly, this whole thing will get challenged anyway. Fuck it and see what sticks.

 

[B-Dubs]

This is really vague and I'm seeing how any of this would work in a bill. Beyond setting the minimum wage, the federal government doesn't really have the ability to determine how private employees are paid. This is why unions are important!

My point is that it's an issue that needs to be taken care of. I'm not prescribing a solution, I don't know enough to do that, just pointing out that it is something that needs to be taken care of or it'll be used to fight against single payer.

 

[aspiegamer]

"Not actually answering any questions or detailing plans is fine as long as it's a thing I might benefit from" is a good summary of the entire 2016 election. #FYGM, or #FYGGM for "fuck you, gonna get mine." Usually that phase works itself out during the primaries (ie, candidates full of shit get exposed for it), but Trump never let off the gas and got away with it.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

That's not what they were saying. The question was what happens to the negotiated health care of union workers (where their payments are effectively wages that get taken before workers see them). The proposed solution was to leave it up to the union to just get that money redistributed back into their salaries, but this wouldn't help non-union workers who would presumably get nothing from the savings.

No, but my answer still applies. Union employees still get what they're currently paid, and they still get the level of healthcare they negotiated for. I mean, yes, part of the healthcare they negotiated for is now guaranteed by the government, and if they'd known that this was going to happen they might have bargained for something else, sure, but they're no worse off than they were before. Saying that 'we should vote this down because union employees fought really hard to get these benefits and now you're just handing this out to everyone!' is cutting your nose off to spite your face. It doesn't make any sense as a rebuttal, which is what I think confused Sanders.

 

[Basileus777]

My point is that it's an issue that needs to be taken care of. I'm not prescribing a solution, I don't know enough to do that, just pointing out that it is something that needs to be taken care of or it'll be used to fight against single payer.

I'm not seeing how it can be taken care of in a federal bill. Some segment of the population won't benefit as much over the ordinary person in terms of health care, but I don't see this as some dire circumstance. They are not losing out anyway, just not benefiting as much comparatively, and in theory businesses should have more flexibility with the wages of the employees. If businesses don't pass these savings onto their employees are you suggesting a more socialist alternative?

 

[Dan]

My point is that it's an issue that needs to be taken care of. I'm not prescribing a solution, I don't know enough to do that, just pointing out that it is something that needs to be taken care of or it'll be used to fight against single payer.

Certainly Bernie's handwaving the issue away and claiming it will simply work itself out to the individual's overall benefit is shortsighted and naive, in terms of both politics and policy.

No, but my answer still applies. Union employees still get what they're currently paid, and they still get the level of healthcare they negotiated for. I mean, yes, part of the healthcare they negotiated for is now guaranteed by the government, and if they'd known that this was going to happen they might have bargained for something else, sure, but they're no worse off than they were before. Saying that 'we should vote this down because union employees fought really hard to get these benefits and now you're just handing this out to everyone!' is cutting your nose off to spite your face. It doesn't make any sense as a rebuttal, which is what I think confused Sanders.

I mean... this makes a lot of assumptions about the consequences of the bill not endangering the private care systems these companies use, and the potential for splitting up portions of care not having cascading repercussions for the feasibility of such systems.

I'm not seeing how it can be taken care of in a federal bill. Some segment of the population won't benefit as much over the ordinary person in terms of health care, but I don't see this as some dire circumstance. They are not losing out anyway, just not benefiting as much comparatively, and in theory businesses should have more flexibility with the wages of the employees. If businesses don't pass these savings onto their employees are you suggesting a more socialist alternative?

In theory businesses should already have much more flexibility with wages given the economy's relative strength and the unemployment rate, and yet wages remain all but stagnant. Why would this change?

 

[Basileus777]

In theory businesses should already have much more flexibility with wages given the economy's relative strength and the unemployment rate, and yet wages remain all but stagnant. Why would this change?

It might not! But at least some segment of Americans will have better coverage and the rest won't lose anything. If you want to further address the issues of capitalism, well what is your solution?

 

[Wilsongt]

There was a school shooting today?

Fuck.

OOOH SHIT

twitter shitheel Flynn Jr is now being investigated.

 

[B-Dubs]

It might not! But at least some segment of Americans will have better coverage and the rest won't lose anything. If you want to further address the issues of capitalism, well what is your solution?

The rest will likely see a tax increase for potentially no benefit to themselves.

 

[Basileus777]

The rest will likely see a tax increase for potentially no benefit to themselves.

The rest probably should see a tax increase.

 

[pigeon]

The rest probably should see a tax increase.

The 70% of Americans who receive employer-provided health insurance deserve to have a tax increase?

I mean, I might say a tax increase is appropriate for expanding social services, but just asserting they all have a moral flaw and are paying too little in taxes seems pretty dramatic.

 

[Plinko]

The rest probably should see a tax increase.

78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. That's a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Basileus777]

The 70% of Americans who receive employer-provided health insurance deserve to have a tax increase?

I mean, I might say a tax increase is appropriate for expanding social services, but just asserting they all have a moral flaw and are paying too little in taxes seems pretty dramatic.

I'm not sure where you are pulling that 70% of Americans will receive a tax increase from.

78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. That's a disaster waiting to happen.

Those aren't the people being discussed!

 

[Plinko]

Those aren't the people being discussed!

Are you discussing the rich? I couldn't tell from the context.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Secret plan to get everyone to join a union.

 

[Basileus777]

Are you discussing the rich? I couldn't tell from the context.

B-Dubs is sufficiently vague that I can't really tell what he is really focusing on, but yes, I was talking about the segment of Americans that already have good enough healthcare that they would not benefit from any federal bill here. Those are not the people living paycheck to paycheck. Upper middle class and wealthy people should be paying higher taxes to pay for healthcare for the rest of the population.