Forestluv

Correct. Idiotic examples for Trump: 1. Let’s drop a nuclear bomb into a hurricane to blow it up. 2. Let’s create a water-filled moat around The Wall that will be stocked with snakes and alligators (he ordered cost estimates for this). 3. Let’s try ingesting disinfectant to kill the coronavirus. 4. He repeatedly pushed advisors to look into buying Greenland 5. Windmills cause cancer Trump prides himself in never reading books and knowing more than experts. This contributes to his idiocy. Sorry to break the news to you, but Trump is even lower on the spiral. Trump is centered in Stage red.

These costs were considered in the 22 studies I linked above. M4A is single payer. It means there is only one payer (the U.S. government). There will still be the same private healthcare firms. Rather than getting paid by various health insurance companies, the private healthcare firms will be paid by the U.S. government. Single Payer healthcare is significantly less expensive than the current system. I linked a meta review above that reviewed 22 independent studies of M4A in the U.S. The consensus is that M4A is cheaper than the current system. One of the main misinformation tactics by health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists is that the costs are too high. It will cost 32 trillion dollars!!! The part they leave out is that we currently pay 34 trillion dollars. The health insure and pharmaceutical companies are making obscene profits and are trying to protect their profits by spreading misinformation. They are not on your side. Don’t fall for it.

These costs were considered in the 22 studies I linked above. M4A is single payer. It means there is only one payer (the U.S. government). There will still be the same private healthcare firms. Rather than getting paid by various health insurance companies, the private healthcare firms will be paid by the U.S. government. Single Payer healthcare is significantly less expensive than the current system. I linked a meta review above that reviewed 22 independent studies of M4A in the U.S. The consensus is that M4A is cheaper than the current system. One of the main misinformation tactics by health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists is that the costs are too high. It will cost 32 trillion dollars!!! The part they leave out is that we currently pay 34 trillion dollars. The health insure and pharmaceutical companies are making obscene profits and are trying to protect their profits by spreading misinformation. They are not on your side. Don’t fall for it.

The U.S. spends an enormous amount on the military (more than the next 10 countries combined). I would say the main advantage is securing the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and the petro dollar. Yet this is starting to change. There have also been enormous inefficiencies and bungled military interventions. For example, the Iraq war wasted and enormous amount of money. I see a couple problems with the U.S. military. First, there is a historical American identity associated with the military and being able to “kick their asses”. For many Americans, there is a deep sense of identity and patriotism with the military. This makes it very difficult for any politician to speak rationally about the military budget. Any politician that even suggested we should consider cutting back on the military is demonized as “weak on defense”. . . . The second problem is that the military has become an enormous powerful for-profit corporation.

I know AOC is very vocal about abolishing ICE. I’m not familiar with that quote. I did a quick google search and only saw it on obscure right-wing websites. I don’t know the validity or the context of it. No. Bernie is a democratic socialist. The classic definition of socialism does not apply. If you are interested, you can learn more about democratic socialism here: https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/ Yes, support does depend on how the question is phrased. Support actually goes up when people learn about the costs. M4A is less expensive than the current U.S. system. Out-of-pocket costs would go down for everyone except super rich people. Since most people like paying less money, support goes up when they hear learn about the costs. Here is a meta review of M4A costs from the journal PLOS. This is a top-level peer-reviewed journal that analyzed 22 different independent studies by government, businesses and academic researchers. The consensus was that M4A is significantly less expensive. https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/practices/new-study-says-medicare-for-all-will-save-u-s-money-lower-healthcare-costs That is not what the 22 studies found. They determined that M4A would be more efficient than the current system in the U.S. The U.S.. currently has one of the most inefficient health care systems in the developed world, so it’s actually not that hard to make it more efficient. The problem is that there is immense pressure from the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries to maintain the current system because they are making obscene profits. Yet these obscene profits come at the cost of providing inefficient healthcare and denying people healthcare. It boils down to who side are you on. . . Do you think people should have crappy healthcare and be overcharged so billionaire CEOs can buy their third yacht they don’t even use? If so, the current system is awesome.

Yes, the phrase can be used in different contexts that have different intentions. The context I was using was in the sense that everyone in the U.S. should have access to healthcare and education. You bring up a good point about people getting scared if it is extended too far. For example, a majority of Americans support Medicare for All (for all U.S. citizens). Yet support plummets when Medicare for All is extended to include undocumented people in the U.S.

@Danioover9000 Thanks for clarifying. I misinterpreted what you meant by “cannot vote”.

@meow_meow Having a grandmother with schizophrenia increases your risk by 4% compared to the general population. Symptoms often begin during adolescence at 16+ y.o. If you haven’t had any symptoms, your risk is lower. I would start off with a lowish dose (around 50ug LSD) in a familiar, peaceful environment.

The U.S. only has two viable parties: Republicans and democrats. The Republican Party is pretty much under the grip of Trump. There are a scattering of moderate Republicans, yet they don’t really have a voice. For example, every one in a while the moderate republican Mitt Romney will criticize Trump and then Trump bullies him silent. They pretty much have no voice. On the democrat side, the moderates have most of the power. They are stage orange and are often referred to as neoliberal / corporate democrats. What you saw of Obama was mostly neoliberalism/corporatism. They are more into wars, protecting profits for corporations, they are funded by corporate lobbyists and billionaires. The progressive wing of the Democratic Party is gaining power and a stronger voice. They have about 30% support of the Democratic Party. This is enough for a voice, yet not enough to nominate a candidate like Bernie Sanders. The progressives are green. They are about restructuring social and political systems to benefit regular people. They do not accepts any money from corporations, lobbyists or billionaires. They are funded by regular people and often have an average donation of under $20. One of their major priorities is Medicare for All - a healthcare system to that found in the Netherlands, Denmark etc. Overall, they want to raise the quality of life for those that are not wealthy. For example, they want to create decent, affordable housing for poor people. They don’t target specific groups like pushing for affordable housing for poor black people. Yet they know that poor people are disproportionately brown and black, so if they raise the quality of life for ALL poor people, they will raise disproportionately help minorities, since poor people are disproportionately minorities. As well, they want to create free university education for ALL people - poor people AND rich people. Again, this will disproportionately help poor people since poor people don’t have access to higher education. . . To me, progressive policies are more aligned with what you are talking about. For example, they are consistent with “All Lives Matter”, they want to give healthcare and education to ALL lives.

Obama is a neoliberal / corporate democrat. I don’t know how many times I need to say this. I am not a supporter of neoliberal / corporate policies. With that said, my comment about us “getting screwed” was in reference to the massive wealth distribution to the Uber wealth and billionaires. Relative to this immoral wealth redistribution, the tax code was much better under Obama.

This is what I was asking for. Could you direct me to what you consider immoral stuff from progressive democrats? (Not neoliberal / corporate democrats).

Are you saying a person that cannot vote has no say in politics? There are many ways someone ineligible to vote can have a say. The person can donate or volunteer for a campaign. The person can try to educate others about candidates. The person can make posts about politics on social media. I’m a U.S. citizen, yet if I volunteered 20hrs a week working for a campaign in a local French election, that would be a huge say.

I dindn’t say he was. He is an active Senator and an example of progressive democrats. It’s not about opinions. The Republican / Trump “tax cut” was a massive wealth redistribution to the Uber wealthy. https://fortune.com/2017/11/03/trump-gop-tax-plan-cuts-2017/ https://inequality.org/research/trump-tax-cuts-inequality/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilomaldonado/2019/10/10/trump-tax-cuts-helped-billionaires-pay-less-taxes-than-the-working-class-in-2018/#5dc8d043128f https://budget.house.gov/publications/publication/gop-tax-law-showers-benefits-wealthy-and-large-corporations-while https://www.newsweek.com/trump-tax-cuts-jobs-act-wealth-economists-inequality-1464048 https://www.wsj.com/articles/tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy-make-inequality-worse-11572561280 Wake up. We are getting screwed. You think wrong. I live in an R+4 district.

I’m not talking about Obama. As I’ve said, I am not a supporter of neoliberalism such as Obama’s or the Clinton’s. I’m asking you about progressives like Bernie Sanders. He is much closer to what you are describing as optimal than Trump. How are progressive democrats like Bernie a greater evil than Trump? I don’t understand why you would align yourself closer to Trump than progressives.

I’m talking about progressives like Bernie Sanders, AOC and Ro Khanna. Not neoliberals like Hillary Clinton and Obama. The progressive democrats in the U.S. are not in favor of any of what you mentioned above about neoliberal democrats. What are the unethical stuff and policies of progressives are you against? For example, what unethical stuff and policies of Bernie Sanders are you against? What you have been describing is much closer to Bernie Sanders than Trump.

What are the bad points of progressives that make them a greater evil than Trump? They are fighting for the superior aspects of the Netherlands, such as the Dutch healthcare system. They are using the Netherlands as a model to upgrade the U.S. Would you really trade the superior social and political systems of the Netherlands for the cluster fuck in the U.S.? In the U.S. the rates of poverty and homelessness is much higher than the Netherlands. The U.S. political corruption is much higher than the Netherlands. The U.S. healthcare system and k-12 education is much worse. Racial tensions are much worse. There are many more mass shootings. Crime rates are higher. Metrics of health and well-being are much lower in the U.S. Life expectancy is lower. . . I don’t understand how you would say progressives fighting for these superior Dutch social / political structures are a greater evil than those fighting against them.

You consider the Dutch healthcare system to be “the lesser of two evils”? The Dutch healthcare system is FAR superior to the U.S. healthcare system. That would be like saying a choice between drinking sewer water and spring water is choosing the lesser of two evils.

I agree. Do you realize that republicans are fighting to maintain that privatized suboptimal system to preserve corporate profits at the expense of optimizing healthcare and progressive democrats are fighting for a superior healthcare system modeled from the social Dutch healthcare system that you yourself describe as more optimal? You are benefitting from a Green-level healthcare system that is supported by progressive democrats and vehemently opposed by Orange level republicans. Trump would want to convert your superior healthcare system into the suboptimal U.S. healthcare system to profit lobbyists and corporations at the expense of providing healthcare to Dutch citizens. Is that something you would support?

@Dutch guy Would you like to trade your Medicare for All healthcare system to a privatized health insurance system like in the U.S.?

@Dand One way to look at it is the evolution and expansion of science. Another approach is to see the science in non-science. Everyone does science everyday without realizing it. Everyone is a scientist. Even a hardcore immaterialist is a scientist. For example: “Based on my sensitivity to mushrooms, I will use a low dose of 25ug of LSD to test my sensitivity. . . (After the trip). I didn’t feel much. Next time, I will bump the dose up to 50ug” <= That is science. Science is everywhere. Artists, mechanics, shamans, athletes, Home Depot cashiers - all scientists. Creativity = Science = Art. . . It’s all inter-related. Humans create arbitrary boundaries and categories. These dualities have practical purpose. For example, a school may have a “Science Day”. Yet upon closer inspection, the dualistic boundaries between science vs. non-science break down.

“‘First They Ignore You, Then They Laugh at You, Then. . . “

A couple other points of hope in Obama’s comments. One is that protestors are more diverse than any other time in U.S. history. Second, a supermajority of people support the protestors - more than at any time in U.S. history for racial equality protests. I’m encouraged to see the protests evolve. The overwhelming majority are peaceful protests and more and more videos of unity is arising. Videos of police chiefs marching with protestors, police and military taking a knee with protestors, white police officers hugging black protestors, national guardsmen dancing the Cupid shuffle with protestors etc. . . These are the types of events and messages needed to raise awareness, bring people together and start a movement toward progress in spite of those trying to escalate division and violence.

You seem to be describing corporate democrats like Hilary, Pelosi and Schumer. I agree that they can be disgusting. They are toxic orange. I’m curious why you would drift toward Trump rather than populists like AOC, Bernie and Ro Khanna. They are real as fuck working their asses off over genuine root issues of the people. They don’t take a penny from corporations and are fully accountable and representative of the people they serve - unlike corporate dems and republicans that are owned by lobbyists and corporations. Have you watched much of kyle kulinski and Jimmy Dore? They have a very similar views as you regarding corporate dems, impeachment, hillary etc. Yet they can also see how republicans and trump are also corrupted to the bone. If you prefer sound dem gov and authentic root issues, why choose corrupted republicans over noncorrupted progressives?

@Bestyle2209 Are you able to utilize psychedelics with animal and/or humans? And do you have access to neuroimagining equipment like EEG and fMRI? In the area of psychology, I tend to favor more objective assays, rather more subjective assays such as surveys.

I’m curious how much internal defection there will be and how much of an effect it will have in the election. In 2016, there was the “Never Trump” republicans, yet it didn’t get much steam and they were marginalized. They hated both Hilary and Trump. . . Yet now there are signs they are getting more organized and making a difference. For example, The Lincoln Project now has a multi-million dollar budget and has been airing ads in swing states. They are lifelong Republicans and have no democratic agenda. This allows them to create very effective ads framed as “America vs Trump” (Rather than democrats vs republicans). As well, Joe Biden seems like an acceptable option for many moderate republicans and independents. . . Further, in 2016 those that disliked both Trump and Hilary, overwhelmingly voted for Trump. This time, those that dislike both Trump and Biden go overwhelmingly to Biden. Lastly, a recent poll indicated that 9% of Trump voters in 2016 plan to vote for Biden. That would be a huge shift. No one that voted for Hilary will switch to Trump. I live in a swing district within a swing state. Over the last few months, I’ve noticed a decline in Trump signs and I now rarely see a MAGA hat. To me, that suggests a shift from moderate support to soft support. Once someone goes soft support, they begin to feel uncomfortable with publicly displaying their identification as a Trumper. Taken together, it seems like there is a small, yet significant shift away from Trump.