Feel The Bern!!!!

[quote=Ekki][quote=Toshabi]POLITICS ON MOOOBAFAAAAAILLLLL!!![/quote]*PTSD flashbacks of families discussing politics*[/quote]

[quote=mastrer1000][quote=mastrer1000] edit: I hope this thread will be as big of a shitfest as I excpect it to[/quote] I knew from page 1[/quote]

[quote=Searz]Regarding Bernie: He claims that he will end the widespread NSA surveilance and seems sincere about it. That's a pretty big positive in my book. I believe Obama made a similar claim, but after years of presidency it seems clear he was talking out his ass.[/quote]

[quote=Lugignaf][quote=Searz]Regarding Bernie: He claims that he will end the widespread NSA surveilance and seems sincere about it. That's a pretty big positive in my book. I believe Obama made a similar claim, but after years of presidency it seems clear he was talking out his ass.[/quote] I mean, he's black and not a member of the majority of the congress' party, so they kinda didn't let him do anything he wanted to. But that's just what I've heard about it.[/quote]

[quote=Searz]Again, don't know the specifics, but I believe I've heard that Obama actually helped bills (or whatever it was) in support of surveillance.[/quote]

[quote=The_Nameless_Bard][quote=Lugignaf]I mean, he's black and not a member of the majority of the congress' party, so they kinda didn't let him do anything he wanted to. But that's just what I've heard about it.[/quote]pretty much.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=Lugignaf]I mean, he's black and not a member of the majority of the congress' party, so they kinda didn't let him do anything he wanted to. But that's just what I've heard about it.[/quote] Everything cannot be explained away by that lazy excuse. I'm sure he's had issues, but when he claims that he will do one thing and then not only refrains from doing so, but does the exact opposite of what he claimed, I think your leniency is misplaced.[/quote]

[quote=Lugignaf]I should've prefaced my first response in this tread with, "my politics knowledge is extremely limited," shouldn't I have? :P Basically, what I said was more of an explanation as to why he hasn't done a of of "good" in office. I had no idea that he had supported something like that, or if it's true in the first place. It also might've been a result of some circumstances out of his control, or just something to pass, that he might've known would go through, just to sort of prove to people, "Look at me, I can have things actually go through congress and win!" Like I said, my knowledge of the things going on in politics is extremely small. I only started following them this year, and even then it's not a lot. I cannot vote currently, not because I'm not of age, but because I don't care enough to actually register to vote right now. That probably sounds terrible, but it's how I feel about it right now. I don't do a large amount of complaining about the president's/congress' work, or lack there of, for that very reason.[/quote]

[quote=Toshabi]I gotto say one thing: Then Democrats: Elect our candidate and we'll fix EVERYTHING ^_^ Now Democrats: 8 YEARS OF REPUBLICANS COCK BLOCKING ALL OUR PLANS! DATS WHY WE SUCKED IN OFFICE! ELECT US AGAIN AND WE'LL SHOW YOU! WE'LL SHOW YOU ALL!!! >:^[ Toshabi is busting chops today. Also, [quote=Mooninites][quote=Vynertje][quote=Mooninites]hmm.... do I trust some random blog on a clearly biased news source or do I listen to the most trusted, credible, and circulated financial news paper in the world read by millions[/quote] The author is a professor in economics. [b]His work was used in the making of that article[/b] in that "most trusted [...] financial news paper in the world". Therefore your claims with regards to reliability are completely bullshit. It makes me wonder if you even bothered to read what I said or just tried to look for ways to discredit my points.[/quote] I guess I didn't realize that Gerald Friedman wrote the blog, in any case it doesn't really change my point I wonder if you even wrote the Wall Street Journal piece or just looked for a way to discredit my post. It was pretty evident that you didn't read it or at the very least don't understand the difference between citation and copy+pasting. The Wall Street Journal piece actually used the citation of an $18 trillion dollar debt increase while ignoring the "$5 trillion it would save". Now I already know you'll try and discredit this piece by saying 'they will pick and choose what they want to believe' and whatever other spewed bullshit you will try and use; but as I will point out, if you had actually read the WSJ article you would have understood why they chose to discredit that portion of his work. (plus I did my own digging) Friedman comes from a long line of liberal Keynesian Voodoo magic economists that believe the more money the government spends the more money it saves, which is both completely baseless and immeasurable. There is no sensible economist in the world that would say spending $18 trillion will save $5 trillion over the course of 10 years which is exactly why that part of his article was discredited. Not only is his claim that we will save $5 trillion completely immeasurable, he claims that this $5 trillion savings will be the result of "Health Savings". Now because you haven't done your due diligence on Friedman, I'll let you in on a little secret, Gerald Friedman has kind of been behind the 8 ball in regards to his predictions on health care and cost savings. He wrote a piece for the 'Dollars & Sense' blog, a liberal leaning blog that attempts to show how terrible America is, which he predicted that Obamacare would be the saving grace for America and health insurance. Magically, under Obamacare the number of citizens insured by private healthcare providers will go up and the cost of said insurance will go down. He claimed that the vast majority of insured citizens would see a decrease in the expense of premiums, co-payments, and out-of-pocket spending over the next 10 years. Unfortunately for Friedman and the United States, these claims were wildly off-base and the complete opposite has happened since Obamacare's full implementation in 2010. Not only that, one of the reasons Friedman was criticized and completely discredited in his piece for Dollars & Sense was that he included illegal immigrants in his figure of uninsured Americans. It's pretty easy to skew the data the way you want when you include roughly 20 million people that wouldn't even be eligible for Obamacare in his uninsured figure. So if you're wondering why the WSJ chose to ignore such a ridiculous claim that Bernie Sanders would save the United States $5 trillion by spending $18 trillion (which honestly I'm slightly surprised you are actually stupid enough to believe, but then again you come from Europe which has a long history of economic incompetence), it's because he's been so wildly off with his health care cost analyses before nobody is taking him seriously now. Sources: Sally Pipes, President of Pacific Research Institute on Obamacare: http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2015/06/29/obamacares-true-costs-are-finally-coming-to-light/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/sallypipes/2014/03/24/four-years-of-obamacare-failures-is-long-enough/ Friendma's predictions on Obamacare: http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2014/0114friedman.html[/quote] As someone who lives with a spouse and earns his own income now and has a household to provide for (Yay! Toshabi owns real estate and is actually living life), I can actually support everything being said here about Obamacare. Fuck you, you don't know how shitty this has been for my spouse and I. We're considered middle class income, so our 'affordable healthcare' costs about 300ish a month. And that BARELY covers any visits to the doctor. And the kicker? We HAVE to have insurance otherwise we'll get financially ball fondled by the IRS. We did find one coverage plan for 50/mo, but it was purely a plan for avoiding the tax penalty (which would still cost more than just taking the tax penalty up the ass). Lucky lucky my spouse's job offers health benefits, but on their plan, you have to schedule your visits weeks in advance. Meaning if I fuck up my leg on the job, either I gotto just take it up the ass and wait the 2-3 weeks or go pay $50 to go to urgent care and whatever medical costs come after that. Sure, Obama care benefits the losers at the lower income bracket, but it really fucks over the losers like me in the lower end of the ballpark of the middle class bracket who barely make it by. And fuck you, I go to school and work full time to try to sustain my sorry ass. And this was the magical healthcare that was supposed to make my life easier? College drones are all up in this bitch in regards to those supporting Obama Care. And just to give you an idea of what middle class is considered to them, that's earning more than $25k a year or a combined income of $50k. Lol. When you start having to pay off student loans, cover rent and other house hold expenses, you'll realize just how fucking shitty all that is for people in my position. So by the age of 26 (1 more year for me), I gotto bugger off from my job I'm at right now (Which is pretty cushiony for the most part) to find a new one that will offer healthcare benefits, JUST so I can avoid this penalty later on in life. So ironically, thanks [s]Obama[/s] Democrats. I'm legitimately living the fuckup you guys made with this AND paying for it. >:[ This is also reason #622 for not even taking you MOBAfailians on politics, albeit for a select few, seriously: You're just a bunch of kids who don't pay for what you have and don't have a clue about how the shit you're blindly supporting is going to fuck you over later on in life. (Also, thanks Moontitties for that post)[/quote]

[quote=Searz]^Yup, pretty much. The US healthcare system is a fucking mess. They have the highest costs in the world yet rank below many countries that have free healthcare. Free healthcare done right is certainly a good thing, but the abomination that is the current US healthcare system needs to be put out of its misery.[/quote]