• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

JNA said:
HEADLINE: People are so stressed by this election that the American Psychological Association has coping tips
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...sociation-has-coping-tips/?tid=pm_local_pop_b

Are you ? and how do you cope ?


like post on Cyburbia on teh Random Thread. ;)
Click to expand...

YES!!!! I'm trying to limit my time on Facebook and the amount of news I watch/read (not so good at the second part). Find ways to laugh about it. Remind myself that there are checks and balances. Spend some time in quiet prayer/meditation in the morning and evening before bed, pray... a lot.
 
So much of this country is up in arms about Clinton/Trump (both in the "deplorable camp" as far as I'm concerned) but yet you don't hear a peep about Congress. Like I've said before, those are the folks that screw us time and time again. Yet we continue to re-elect people to Congress in droves.
 
It takes a special kind of idiot to equate our town's streetscape initiative to Hillary Clinton. :-c However it was done yesterday. 8-!
 
I saw a post on FB that if Bernie wins Vermont with write-in votes and neither Clinton or Trump get enough electoral college votes, Bernie could be 'appointed' president. I have seen several of these what-if things recently.

The only 3rd party candidate that is on the ballot in all 50 dates is Gary Johnson, who might win his home state. Additionally, I am shocked that the election is still this close between Trump and Clinton.
 
michaelskis said:
I saw a post on FB that if Bernie wins Vermont with write-in votes and neither Clinton or Trump get enough electoral college votes, Bernie could be 'appointed' president. I have seen several of these what-if things recently.

The only 3rd party candidate that is on the ballot in all 50 dates is Gary Johnson, who might win his home state. Additionally, I am shocked that the election is still this close between Trump and Clinton.
Click to expand...

There's a possibility of Evan McMullin taking Utah, too.
 
michaelskis said:
I saw a post on FB that if Bernie wins Vermont with write-in votes and neither Clinton or Trump get enough electoral college votes, Bernie could be 'appointed' president. I have seen several of these what-if things recently.

The only 3rd party candidate that is on the ballot in all 50 dates is Gary Johnson, who might win his home state. Additionally, I am shocked that the election is still this close between Trump and Clinton.
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on what you mean by 'close' but my impression is that Trump is in deep deficits in the polls currently and has pretty much been in deficit for 98% of the campaign.

538 has some fairly reliable/accurate info on their averaged polling methodology.
 
WSU MUP Student said:
Meh. I don't consider that much of a toss-up. Clinton would need to win only two of those states labeled "toss ups" and not also labeled Maine or New Hampshire. Trump would need to basically run the board.
Click to expand...

If you take VT (Bernie write in), UT, and NM out of play, and if by some freak of nature wins NC, OH and FL it changes the picture a bit. Clinton has a massive advantage knowing that CA, IL, and 99% of the NE is locked up for her.

It is a long shot, but I pray that we don't end up with Trump or Clinton. However, there are too many sheeple out there that it will likely be Clinton.



On a side note, on a scale of 1-10, how bad was Watergate compared to the stuff that Clinton or Tump have done in their lives? I know that there are a lot of people in here that support Clinton and for the life of me I don't understand why. I know some people who support Trump, but the only real justification is that he is not Clinton.




And then there is this....
CNN said:
A GOP office in Hillsborough, North Carolina, was firebombed over the weekend, with a swastika and the words "Nazi Republicans get out of town or else" spray painted on an adjacent building, according to local officials.

"The flammable substance appears to have ignited inside the building, burned some furniture and damaged the building's interior before going out. The substance was housed in a bottle thrown through one of the building's front windows," according to a statement by the town of Hillsborough.
Click to expand...

Is this what we can expect from Clinton supporters?
 
Last edited:
michaelskis said:
And then there is this....


Is this what we can expect from Clinton supporters?
Click to expand...
That's what Trump announced before any sort of investigation started. And you know how she's been whippin' up her supporters hinting they should engage in acts of violence and mayhem. So must be true, huh? Seems to me it could just as easily be a Johnson supporter - or even, believe it or not, a TRUMP supporter (I actually think this the most likely scenario).
 
Maister said:
That's what Trump announced before any sort of investigation started. And you know how she's been whippin' up her supporters hinting they should engage in acts of violence and mayhem. So must be true, huh? Seems to me it could just as easily be a Johnson supporter - or even, believe it or not, a TRUMP supporter (I actually think this the most likely scenario).
Click to expand...

So are you saying that it is possible that Clinton supporters organized and started the violence that the Trump rallies like some of the extreme right wing fringe is claiming.

I highly doubt that it was Johnson supporters and I think it is more likely to be a Clinton supporter than it would be a Trump supporter, but it is possible. Especially when Clinton and her team have been supporters of Saul Alinsky and this seems to be a page out of the book Rules for Radicals more than the book Art of the Deal.
 
michaelskis said:
So are you saying that it is possible that Clinton supporters organized and started the violence that the Trump rallies like some of the extreme right wing fringe is claiming.

I highly doubt that it was Johnson supporters and I think it is more likely to be a Clinton supporter than it would be a Trump supporter, but it is possible. Especially when Clinton and her team have been supporters of Saul Alinsky and this seems to be a page out of the book Rules for Radicals more than the book Art of the Deal.
Click to expand...

I think the idea that it is indicative of Clinton supporters is just plain silly. Just as there are stupid Trump supporters, there are stupid Clinton supporters. They both have people who don't act in good faith and doing things that the general whole wouldn't support. These people are not indicative of the whole. Kinda like Muslims.....

I think we are so quick to blame these days. Instead of Trump trying to incite violence, or blame "systematic rigging" of the system, we should be trying to build our country up. Trump is really just a macrocosm of what the vitriol in our language has produced. I also think he is just the living embodiment of words that a lot of people would only say online, hidden behind the veil of the internet or made up names. We need this pain to try and clean up our country and start moving on from the old system, the old thinking, and the old people for that matter. 2020 will be a completely different election. My guess is that it won't have Trump or Clinton. I think it will be a 40-45 year old winner. I think it will be about economic and social issues.

I believe our country can and will do better.
 
michaelskis said:
So are you saying that it is possible that Clinton supporters organized and started the violence that the Trump rallies like some of the extreme right wing fringe is claiming.
Click to expand...

I was being facetious. :r:
On a side note Trump should take a page out of Hillary's book concerning her response to the incident. She immediately condemned the act. This is what Trump has failed to do repeatedly during this campaign. Hillary provided none of that coy...well, I can't control all those 2nd Amendment people out there. Sometimes people take matters into their own hands. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's an armed insurrection if I don't win on Election Day.....:-{
 
Maister said:
I was being facetious. :r:
On a side note Trump should take a page out of Hillary's book concerning her response to the incident. She immediately condemned the act. This is what Trump has failed to do repeatedly during this campaign. Hillary provided none of that coy...well, I can't control all those 2nd Amendment people out there. Sometimes people take matters into their own hands. And I wouldn't be surprised if there's an armed insurrection if I don't win on Election Day.....:-{
Click to expand...

I thought her response was terrific and you are 100% correct. A democrat group even started a go-fund-me site to raise money to help with repairs.

My point is we have two candidates that are bringing out the worst in society. Neither campaign has positive message and playing off the fears of what the other might do. I fear that your prediction about an armed altercation will be correct. My wife and I plan on voting early to avoid such a conflict.
 
michaelskis said:
I thought her response was terrific and you are 100% correct. A democrat group even started a go-fund-me site to raise money to help with repairs.

My point is we have two candidates that are bringing out the worst in society. Neither campaign has positive message and playing off the fears of what the other might do. I fear that your prediction about an armed altercation will be correct. My wife and I plan on voting early to avoid such a conflict.
Click to expand...

I'm going to be on a train on the way back from NYC on election day. Ballot already mailed. And I also do not plan to attend any public events with whoever is elected. I think the chances for assassination attempts and rebellious brawls are going to be very high over the next presidential term.
 
Planit said:
I'm going to vote on Election Day, mainly to see what's going on at the polls and if there will be any fights.
Click to expand...

michaelskis said:
Same here.
Click to expand...

michaelskis said:
I fear that your prediction about an armed altercation will be correct. My wife and I plan on voting early to avoid such a conflict.
Click to expand...


You've now changed your mind on this huh?



gtpeach said:
I think the chances for assassination attempts and rebellious brawls are going to be very high over the next presidential term.
Click to expand...

I've actually thought that for the last 4 years, and that concern will continue for me...which ever idiot is elected.





Firebombing was an extreme act of violence/domestic terror which we should not ignore. Unlike the Kansas militia event that has received very little attention.




Lastly, the Hairy Cheeto continues to bring up that the election is rigged. All the other Republicans say this is untrue and the results will be honored. Does nobody remember what happened in FLA just 12 years ago? Does nobody even bring up the gerrymandering question? YES ITS RIGGED in the direction of the right and has been for many years. It's surprising to me that they are crying foul now and have been trying to change voter laws for the last 8 years (and many states have had to repeal them by the federal court as unconstitutional).

Now in history you will find this the other way around, BUT recent history points the finger clearly and directly in a certain direction.
 
Come vote on Sunday, SUNDAY!

As a courtesy to electors wishing to vote their absentee ballot in person, the Grand Rapids Clerk's Office will provide extended office hours to accommodate the public interest. The dates and times are as follows:

Tuesday, Oct. 18 5 - 7 p.m.
Thursday, Oct. 20 5 - 7 p.m.
Tuesday, Oct. 25 5 - 7 p.m.
Thursday, Oct. 27 5 - 7 p.m.
**SUNDAY, OCT. 30** Noon – 5 p.m.
Tuesday, Nov. 1 5 - 7 p.m.
Saturday, Nov. 5 8 a.m. – 2 p.m.

For the first time in years, the doors of City Hall will be open on a Sunday -- Oct. 30 -- to provide an additional opportunity to the community for in-person absentee voting.

"This is a historic moment in the City of Grand Rapids, as the doors are usually closed and quiet on Sundays," City Clerk O'Neal said. "Recognizing the importance of this Presidential election, compounded with busy schedules, voters are seeking for a more convenient time and ways to vote, so we're waking up City Hall. We are happy to extend this unusual occurrence to members of the voting community and we encourage voters to come out," O'Neal added.​


I voted yesterday. No waiting, didn't need to remember my precinct number.
 
Veloise said:
As a courtesy to electors wishing to vote their absentee ballot in person, the Grand Rapids Clerk’s Office will provide extended office hours to accommodate the public interest. The dates and times are as follows...​


I voted yesterday. No waiting, didn't need to remember my precinct number.
Click to expand...

I turned in my absentee ballot last week. I usually prefer to vote in person before work on election day but I have another early morning meeting that day and there was no guarantee that I'd be able to get to my precinct after work either. It was nice to be able to just walk in and turn in my ballot and be done with the thing already.

I also voted a straight ticket out of spite since our legislators tried to take that option away and the courts slapped them down.
 
I'm lucky, the county clerk's office is right next door so I'll just walk over and vote when it comes time.

I'll probably vote a lot of D, but that's because I like the guy running for state office and the rest of the state officials need to stop sucking up to the governor who's trying to destroy the state.

I also have to vote to retain our judges. Big issue here.
 
Veloise said:
As a courtesy to electors wishing to vote their absentee ballot in person, the Grand Rapids Clerk's Office will provide extended office hours to accommodate the public interest. The dates and times are as follows:

Tuesday, Oct. 18 5 - 7 p.m.
Thursday, Oct. 20 5 - 7 p.m.
Tuesday, Oct. 25 5 - 7 p.m.
Thursday, Oct. 27 5 - 7 p.m.
**SUNDAY, OCT. 30** Noon – 5 p.m.
Tuesday, Nov. 1 5 - 7 p.m.
Saturday, Nov. 5 8 a.m. – 2 p.m.

For the first time in years, the doors of City Hall will be open on a Sunday -- Oct. 30 -- to provide an additional opportunity to the community for in-person absentee voting.

"This is a historic moment in the City of Grand Rapids, as the doors are usually closed and quiet on Sundays," City Clerk O'Neal said. "Recognizing the importance of this Presidential election, compounded with busy schedules, voters are seeking for a more convenient time and ways to vote, so we're waking up City Hall. We are happy to extend this unusual occurrence to members of the voting community and we encourage voters to come out," O'Neal added.​


I voted yesterday. No waiting, didn't need to remember my precinct number.
Click to expand...

This is one of the things that I love about NC. We have early voting. In many counties here, they have multiple locations and you can vote at any of them as long as it is the same county.

For the location that I am going to, which is on the opposite side of the county from where I live, this is the schedule:
Thursday, October 20 - Friday, October 21 9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, October 22 8:30 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Sunday, October 23 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Monday, October 24 - Friday, October 28 9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, October 29 8:30 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Sunday, October 30 1:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
Monday, October 31 - Friday, November 4 9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Saturday, November 5 9:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.
 
The Terminator said:
Just absentee voted. Held my nose and went with Hill-Dog. I feel SICK to my stomach doing so but I am that scared of trump.
Click to expand...

My sister-in-law has been sharing those heavily edited O'Keefe videos "proving" the large-scale vote rigging conspiracies are true. I feel sick to my stomach every time I see those in my feed. I can't hide them fast enough.

I think it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that barring something completely crazy, Hillary will be our next president. The big question is what is the fallout going to be. And will people ever be convinced that it's legitimate. For the life of me, I cannot understand how folks truly believe that the only reason Trump will lose is because someone cheated.
 
My son and I voted yesterday. He stayed true to his convictions and did not cast a vote atop the ballot (he did vote yea on a school referendum at the true top of the ballot). I voted mostly D because I judged them to be more sane than the R folks.

Now if I could just opt out of all the political commercials, ads, fliers, debates ...

Nov. 9th will be here soon enough.:h:
 
I see tonight's presidential debate is being held in Vegas. I can only assume it's being held at the Circus Circus hotel and convention center.
 
The local paper has been publishing question and answers with local candidates. It's completely insane when the most logical reasonable candidate is the random retired school teacher who has 0 political experience. There is some young guy running and he is completely and utterly clueless. Some great excerpts include:

- Something that I found really interesting, there is only one state that has mandatory computer classes to graduate high school, so I am thinking why can't we do that in North Carolina.
Why?! Kids learn that stuff almost from the womb now. A kid in high school will know how to do that, and all that will come of that class is general debauchery and terrible grades because no one will be interested in it.

- I read a study by a German company that said by 2030 80 percent of the world's population will live in an urban metropolitan center. So we either have to become that urban metropolitan center or find a way to slow down that process."
Really? That's your big answer? To either come up with nearly 783 thousand people in our county in just shy of 14 years or "slow down the process". Why even comment at that point? You're basically saying rural communities are dying, and to get over it.

The incumbent still claims that HB2 was "common sense law" which is a fallacy, so he's on my s**t list too.
 
AG74683 said:
- Something that I found really interesting, there is only one state that has mandatory computer classes to graduate high school, so I am thinking why can’t we do that in North Carolina.
Why?! Kids learn that stuff almost from the womb now. A kid in high school will know how to do that, and all that will come of that class is general debauchery and terrible grades because no one will be interested in it.

- I read a study by a German company that said by 2030 80 percent of the world’s population will live in an urban metropolitan center. So we either have to become that urban metropolitan center or find a way to slow down that process.”
Really? That's your big answer? To either come up with nearly 783 thousand people in our county in just shy of 14 years or "slow down the process". Why even comment at that point? You're basically saying rural communities are dying, and to get over it.
Click to expand...

Just so I'm clear, the non-italics were the actual answers and the italicized portions were your thoughts? 'Cause I first read that as the candidates going back and forth with each other, which would've been amazing!
 
gtpeach said:
Just so I'm clear, the non-italics were the actual answers and the italicized portions were your thoughts? 'Cause I first read that as the candidates going back and forth with each other, which would've been amazing!
Click to expand...

Italicized are my own comments, standard print is the candidates.
 
Do you have yours -

12205317_G.jpg
 
JNA said:
Do you have yours -

12205317_G.jpg
Click to expand...

I saw Hillary and Donald bobbleheads in an Newark airport shop back in mid-Sept. I kicking myself that I didn't pull the trigger and buy one of each.



SCOTUS

McCain spills the Republicans strategy for SCOTUS nomination...obstructing anyone nominated by any Democrat was the endgame all along.

Speaking Monday to Philadelphia's WPHT-AM radio in an interview promoting fellow Republican Sen. Pat Toomey, McCain made it clear for the first time that Republicans will continue to block anyone the next president nominates to the Supreme Court as well as the last one: "I promise you that we will be united against any Supreme Court nominee that Hillary Clinton, if she were president, would put up," McCain said.


http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...otus_comments_reveal_a_lot_about_the_gop.html
 
If Hilldog wins it'll be 4 more years of Obama in the sense the GOP will just continue to obstruct everything like spoiled children who can't get their way.
 
dvdneal said:
If Hilldog wins it'll be 4 more years of Obama in the sense the GOP will just continue to obstruct everything like spoiled children who can't get their way.
Click to expand...

Except I think you'll see a constitutional challenge to SCOTUS if, by some strange miracle, the Senate is still controlled by the GOP and obstructs SCOTUS nominations. I get a distinct sense from some of the comments of SCOTUS judges that they are none too happy with an empty seat.
 
dvdneal said:
If Hilldog wins it'll be 4 more years of Obama in the sense the GOP will just continue to obstruct everything like spoiled children who can't get their way.
Click to expand...

Strangely, I think a GOP held Congress is actually our safest bet here. The GOP won't do anything in Trump's favor because he's pissed off the majority of their leaders, and they despise Hillary and will block anything she tries to put through. The entire House is up for re-election this year and the Senate could shift power as well.
 
I watched 20 minutes of the debate. If it went that way for the entire night it was somewhere in between :facepalm: and :victory:

Not once was it :unitedstates:


Prediction: Hillary will win, gun rights will become limited, government will get bigger, we will be less safe, the middle class will continue to be eliminated and the wealthy and wall street will continue to control the money while the rest of us will be screwed. She will get challenged in 4 years by her own party and will lose the nomination.

On a side note, my wife got her health insurance stuff from her employer (a hospital) and our rates will once again be going up. As will the co-pays, and all of our other costs.

How is the "Affordable Care Act" working out for all of you? Has it made healthcare affordable yet? I can tell you that the increase in health insurance cost (not including copays or anything like that) is greater than the cost of living raises that we received. Factor in the increasing cost of energy and heating, food, water, child care, and drygoods, our buying power is decreasing by 10% to 15%.

Don't me wrong, neither of the people on stage last night are capable of fixing this issue and for Congress and the Senate, the R or D behind their names means nothing. Unless you're a major campaign contributor or major corporation, they don't care about you. Only their reelection.
 
dvdneal said:
If Hilldog wins it'll be 4 more years of Obama in the sense the GOP will just continue to obstruct everything like spoiled children who can't get their way.
Click to expand...

Suburb Repairman said:
Except I think you'll see a constitutional challenge to SCOTUS if, by some strange miracle, the Senate is still controlled by the GOP and obstructs SCOTUS nominations. I get a distinct sense from some of the comments of SCOTUS judges that they are none too happy with an empty seat.
Click to expand...

AG74683 said:
Strangely, I think a GOP held Congress is actually our safest bet here. The GOP won't do anything in Trump's favor because he's pissed off the majority of their leaders, and they despise Hillary and will block anything she tries to put through. The entire House is up for re-election this year and the Senate could shift power as well.
Click to expand...

Here's the quote from that article I cited that galls me the most:
If you doubt whether McCain could really mean what he said on Monday, look no further than the actions of the GOP when that well-regarded judge, recommended by a senior Republican senator (Dick Lugar), was blocked for no reason other that Obama had named him.
(my emphasis added)


Remember Mitch McConnell said from day one of the Obama administration that the Republicans first job was to make him a one-term president (how did that work for you?)



michaelskis said:
How is the "Affordable Care Act" working out for all of you? Has it made healthcare affordable yet? I can tell you that the increase in health insurance cost (not including copays or anything like that) is greater than the cost of living raises that we received. Factor in the increasing cost of energy and heating, food, water, child care, and drygoods, our buying power is decreasing by 10% to 15%.
Click to expand...


Insurance premiums have risen to a far greater % than cost of living before the Affordable Care Act was passed. Being in the (official) workforce for over 33 years, I have seen this repeatedly at every employer. One particular increase I still remember was 13% in the early 2000s. I remember it because the economy was humming right along but our insurance was slapped hard. HR couldn't explain it except that the insurance companies were requiring it.





Primaries - done
Debates - done
Election - can't come soon enough
Next 4 years - ugh!
 
Planit said:
Insurance premiums have risen to a far greater % than cost of living before the Affordable Care Act was passed. Being in the (official) workforce for over 33 years, I have seen this repeatedly at every employer. One particular increase I still remember was 13% in the early 2000s. I remember it because the economy was humming right along but our insurance was slapped hard. HR couldn't explain it except that the insurance companies were requiring it.
Click to expand...

And it was one of the many things that Obamacare was expected to fix. But not only is it not affordable, almost everyone is saying that it is a failure and many say that the increases are because of Obama Care:


http://www.investors.com/politics/e...ailing-exactly-the-way-critics-said-it-would/
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...nsurance-medicine-0911-jm-20160909-story.html
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/299130-bill-clinton-slams-obamacare
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcom....google.com/&referrer=https://www.google.com/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinion/atlas-obamacare-poor-middle-class/
http://www.vox.com/2016/8/25/12630214/obamacare-marketplaces-death-spiral
http://amac.us/the-repeal-of-obamac...-law-may-cause-it-to-self-destruct-says-amac/
http://www.theatlantic.com/business...are-health-reform-insurance-economics/500348/


Are you willing to admit that it is a failure and is doing more harm than good?
 
Insurance premiums would have increased without Obama Care too, so it's really a moot point. Medical insurance and the medical industry as a whole is nothing but a major scam. The whole idea that was "Obama Care" was destroyed by partisan politics anyways.
 
AG74683 said:
Insurance premiums would have increased without Obama Care too, so it's really a moot point. Medical insurance and the medical industry as a whole is nothing but a major scam. The whole idea that was "Obama Care" was destroyed by partisan politics anyways.
Click to expand...

True. I'm convinced ObamaCare, whose insurance markets are actually a GOP idea, was designed to demonstrate that the insurance companies are a critical part of the problem and that single-payer is likely the only method by which medical cost reduction can be achieved.

The bones for it are already there with Medicare and Tricare.
 
With or without Obamacare the insurance companies seemed to make a profit and I can't think of a year that my premiums didn't go up in one way or another. I think we need some oversight and regulations that work to control the health care industry and their grab for money just like we do with the banks. Oh wait, bad example.
 
Suburb Repairman said:
True. I'm convinced ObamaCare, whose insurance markets are actually a GOP idea, was designed to demonstrate that the insurance companies are a critical part of the problem and that single-payer is likely the only method by which medical cost reduction can be achieved.

The bones for it are already there with Medicare and Tricare.
Click to expand...

dvdneal said:
With or without Obamacare the insurance companies seemed to make a profit and I can't think of a year that my premiums didn't go up in one way or another. I think we need some oversight and regulations that work to control the health care industry and their grab for money just like we do with the banks. Oh wait, bad example.
Click to expand...

Insurance companies also saw a golden opportunity to jack up premium rates and disguise them as Obama Care related issues. Health care should be simplified to two paths. 1) Publicly funded similar to Canada or 2) private health care paid for by the individual. These options would cover all Americans. Either you have government provided care, or you can opt to pay a premium for your own services (and likely receive premium care). Insurance lobbyists will kill any attempt at a public system though.

Health care and medical related bills are easily the largest contributor to bankruptcies in the United States, and further depress the lower middle to lower class individuals, who overwhelmingly comprise of the bulk of those needing regular medical care (largely due to diet inequality, but that's a whole separate issue). Our health should not be at the whims of our elected officials or some fool who decides he needs a new Lambo so he jacks up the price of critical AIDS drugs overnight to fund it.
 
michaelskis said:
Are you willing to admit that it is a failure and is doing more harm than good?
Click to expand...

Nope. But I will say the law needs to be tweaked/modified/changed as we gain more and more knowledge about its fallacies and benefits.

I could say the tax code "is a failure and is doing more harm than good" but I don't. It needs to be updated too in a very bad way, but I won't throw out the baby with the bathwater.
 
AG74683 said:
Insurance companies also saw a golden opportunity to jack up premium rates and disguise them as Obama Care related issues. Health care should be simplified to two paths. 1) Publicly funded similar to Canada or 2) private health care paid for by the individual. These options would cover all Americans. Either you have government provided care, or you can opt to pay a premium for your own services (and likely receive premium care). Insurance lobbyists will kill any attempt at a public system though.

Health care and medical related bills are easily the largest contributor to bankruptcies in the United States, and further depress the lower middle to lower class individuals, who overwhelmingly comprise of the bulk of those needing regular medical care (largely due to diet inequality, but that's a whole separate issue). Our health should not be at the whims of our elected officials or some fool who decides he needs a new Lambo so he jacks up the price of critical AIDS drugs overnight to fund it.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem with the healthcare industry is they are out to make money and the government programs protect profit. Drug companies are not interested in finding a cure for illnesses as much as they are about making a profit. Furthermore, if the federal government really wanted to help people be healthier, they would restructure the farm bill to encourage farmers to grow produce crops (not corn, soy, or wheat), would make things like gym memberships and other healthy activities tax deductible *assuming they want to continue to complicate the tax code*, they would restructure the FDA requirements on what farmers can use on their crops and what can be categorized as food and what can't, and really focus on health prevention programs. The problem is none of these are profitable to major corporations and regardless if Hillary or Trump gets elected, Wall Street and corporations will still control the WH.
 
michaelskis said:
Furthermore, if the federal government really wanted to help people be healthier, they would restructure the farm bill to encourage farmers to grow produce crops (not corn, soy, or wheat), would make things like gym memberships and other healthy activities tax deductible *assuming they want to continue to complicate the tax code*, they would restructure the FDA requirements on what farmers can use on their crops and what can be categorized as food and what can't, and really focus on health prevention programs. The problem is none of these are profitable to major corporations and regardless if Hillary or Trump gets elected, Wall Street and corporations will still control the WH.
Click to expand...

Going after farmers and the family farm (which by and large doesn't exist any longer) is not going to solve many problems. If people think that GMO free is going to save the world, good luck to you. Here is a pill with no gluten that will save your life. :r:

Going after corporate banks and CEO compensation probably could. Restructuring the tax code to tax purchasing, instead of saving, or making money, would also help. Double and triple taxing people, doesn't help. I think that hurts the ability of the government to have people truly support the tax system. Taking 60% of the $10 million that my dad earned (he didn't but I wish he did) that he didn't spend and wants to give to me, because the government needs a second cut, makes my dad want to cheat the system so he can give it to me. He will spend up to $5.99 million to assure that he doesn't have to pay any of it.

Tax spending. Tax at a higher rate the more money you make. But do it once. The tax code would be much simpler if we all just paid a single tax. Paying sales, income, payroll, etc. just makes things confusing and allows for lots of loopholes.
 
Hink said:
Going after farmers and the family farm (which by and large doesn't exist any longer) is not going to solve many problems. If people think that GMO free is going to save the world, good luck to you. Here is a pill with no gluten that will save your life. :r:

Going after corporate banks and CEO compensation probably could. Restructuring the tax code to tax purchasing, instead of saving, or making money, would also help. Double and triple taxing people, doesn't help. I think that hurts the ability of the government to have people truly support the tax system. Taking 60% of the $10 million that my dad earned (he didn't but I wish he did) that he didn't spend and wants to give to me, because the government needs a second cut, makes my dad want to cheat the system so he can give it to me. He will spend up to $5.99 million to assure that he doesn't have to pay any of it.

Tax spending. Tax at a higher rate the more money you make. But do it once. The tax code would be much simpler if we all just paid a single tax. Paying sales, income, payroll, etc. just makes things confusing and allows for lots of loopholes.
Click to expand...

Hink, I apologize if I was not clear about my farm comment. Currently most of the farm subsidies go to non-produce based agricultural projects, mainly corn and soy which are used in other products such as high fructose corn syrup, ethanol, and about 1000 other things. Instead, I believe that if the government is going to fund farms, then they should require that it be a direct to consumer produce product such as fruits, nuts, and vegetables. This would substantially reduce the costs of high nutrient based foods. It has nothing to do with GMOs or gluten free. It has to do with lowering the consumer cost of produce and increasing the availability.

I agree with your tax idea. I think it would be awesome.
 
michaelskis said:
Hink, I apologize if I was not clear about my farm comment. Currently most of the farm subsidies go to non-produce based agricultural projects, mainly corn and soy which are used in other products such as high fructose corn syrup, ethanol, and about 1000 other things. Instead, I believe that if the government is going to fund farms, then they should require that it be a direct to consumer produce product such as fruits, nuts, and vegetables. This would substantially reduce the costs of high nutrient based foods. It has nothing to do with GMOs or gluten free. It has to do with lowering the consumer cost of produce and increasing the availability.

I agree with your tax idea. I think it would be awesome.
Click to expand...

I'm no farmer, so I have no clue, but do direct consumer products like you describe cost more to farm? Interestingly, it looks like corn costs quite a bit per acre to farm (nearly 700 dollars according to http://ageconomists.com/2015/08/03/...ts-point-to-more-of-the-same-for-u-s-farmers/).
 
AG74683 said:
I'm no farmer, so I have no clue, but do direct consumer products like you describe cost more to farm? Interestingly, it looks like corn costs quite a bit per acre to farm (nearly 700 dollars according to http://ageconomists.com/2015/08/03/...ts-point-to-more-of-the-same-for-u-s-farmers/).
Click to expand...

Corn and soybeans feed almost all commercial animal production in the country, which is a strong reason so much is produced. The government also pays farmers not to farm certain crops.

Farming is so specialized now that depending on where you are in the US you really only have so many options. The problem isn't willingness to plant fruit, nuts, etc. It is what happens when there is a down year. Crop insurance isn't substantial enough to cover bad years. Many crops take years to get to fruit or to bring value. If I invest 7 years into grapes, and one year of insane cold or heat or something else wipes them all out, I have to start over. Wheat, corn, and soybeans are very sturdy. They grow well in most climates. They are easily planted, easily harvestable, and in general when planted in rotation, provide the nutrients back into the soil that are needed for the next years crops to be productive. They have a cycle that can be followed and production can be increased with mechanical efficiency.

Vegetables are produced mostly in the south, where it doesn't get cold. They are produced in industrial greenhouses. This isn't due to the value (basil farms make a fortune), it is due to the climate. No farmer in Ohio is going to go to just basil. Or just pumpkins. Or just whatever. Unless they are doing it as a more local kitschy thing (which is great, but doesn't pay the bills), they are not going to go all in on these things which only can bring a short term value and have a set limit of buyers. I liken it to Christmas Tree farmers. How many can be supported? There are only so many people who want Christmas Trees. Sure it would be great if all communities had their own Christmas Tree farmer, but that is too many. The farmer wouldn't sell enough trees to stay in business. He needs 5 communities worth of people. I could go on.

The politics of farming in the United States is really tricky. It isn't simply fixed and it truly would require a complete rethinking of how we feed our animals, how we reduce risk for farmers, and how we prioritize our local produce. Not something that can done easily.
 
You also have to think of the crops like a diversified investment portfolio. We do a lot of wheat in Kansas because we do it better than anyone else, but at the same time they usually double crop with soy or have some fields of milo. Some other crop in case one fails. This year we had an amazing crop of wheat. [Trump Voice] So amazing. [Trump Voice] Sadly the prices fell out of the market because of the excess supply and a lot of people didn't recover their costs to plant the stuff. Good thing most farmers had a back up crop. This of course hits at least the local economy pretty hard. No one is buying that new barn or F-150. I notice bad harvests with a distinct decline in building permits.
 
dvdneal said:
You also have to think of the crops like a diversified investment portfolio. We do a lot of wheat in Kansas because we do it better than anyone else, but at the same time they usually double crop with soy or have some fields of milo. Some other crop in case one fails. This year we had an amazing crop of wheat. [Trump Voice] So amazing. [Trump Voice] Sadly the prices fell out of the market because of the excess supply and a lot of people didn't recover their costs to plant the stuff. Good thing most farmers had a back up crop. This of course hits at least the local economy pretty hard. No one is buying that new barn or F-150. I notice bad harvests with a distinct decline in building permits.
Click to expand...

Here is a rundown of what is subsidised per state.
https://farm.ewg.org/

Furthermore, here is a rundown on how those crops are used
http://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/

My point is if we are going to fund these farms, why not fund something that you can eat directly that has a higher nutritional content, thus resulting lower food costs and a healthier population. Think about your grocery bill. What is more expensive healthy food or junk food? Yes, different states have different production options, Cherries grow better than Oranges in Michigan, but every state has something that has a high nutrient content that they could grow. However, the federal government provides incentives for them to grow other stuff, or nothing at all.

I also think that it could do a better job of funding urban farming projects like those in Detroit or Milwaukee.
 
Back
Top