Talk about Trump (and other off topic stuff)

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, AlwaysFSX said:

Still doesn't fix the root issue.

The root issue being the government needs to stay out of our lives.

 

Feminists want the government to keep their hands off of their uterus because #ItsMyBody but when it comes to Obamacare naw man we gotta get with that shit because reasons

[Guest Kloaked]

1 minute ago, DeadEyePsycho said:

I haven't gotten around to watching the whole thing yet, I was just commenting on that particular clip. I'm in a break between classes at the moment so I'll have to watch it later.

I'm not fond of either of them in my own politics, and both of them make me cringe. However, Ted brought up very good points that I think everyone would be able to get with as I implied earlier. It's a good watch.

 

Good luck with your classes.

[AlwaysFSX]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Oh, really? I thought it was because our healthcare system was for profit, but please do tell what the root of the problem is.

It is because it's for profit but simply shoving the cost on to someone else, either by tax or any other system still doesn't offset the costs.

 

Just "having" a free healthcare system in place that takes taxes to provide healthcare support to citizens out cannot work in our country.

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

The root issue being the government needs to stay out of our lives.

 

Feminists want the government to keep their hands off of their uterus because #ItsMyBody but when it comes to Obamacare naw man we gotta get with that shit because reasons

Eh, debatable. I'm of the opinion 99.9% of you are unable to function without someone guiding you where to go because frankly, 99.9% of people on this planet are dumber than rocks.

 

Let's start with something small, let's make prostitution legal.

[2FA]

3 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Still doesn't fix the root issue.

Yeah, yeah. High costs I get it.

 

 

 

[revl8er]

2 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

The root issue being the government needs to stay out of our lives.

 

Feminists want the government to keep their hands off of their uterus because #ItsMyBody but when it comes to Obamacare naw man we gotta get with that shit because reasons

Reasons being that Trump is the one who is trying to get rid of it.  They don't care that their prices are increasing because they are too focused on the Trump hate.  I doubt we will see a healthcare reform anytime soon in this country though because everyone is too focused on lining their pockets.  

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, revl8er said:

Reasons being that Trump is the one who is trying to get rid of it.  They don't care that their prices are increasing because they are too focused on the Trump hate.  I doubt we will see a healthcare reform anytime soon in this country though because everyone is too focused on lining their pockets.  

He supposedly wants to replace it with something better. If they can do it, I'm on board personally.

[ivan134]

6 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

My view on "stooping to someone's level" is that you can't just blanket conservatives and liberals, or Trump voters vs. Hillary voters. That's why you had a lot of centrists leaning for Trump, especially the ones who didn't mind political incorrectness. Trump spoke to that audience, and while yes, he should've had a more presidential manner throughout, he also said things Obama or Hillary wouldn't dare to use, especially terms like "radical Islamic terrorism", and targeting the source heavily.

 

I commend all voters who, while prefer one candidate, wish the best for the other(s). Morgan Freeman comes to mind. Hillary supporter but wants Trump to succeed on all fronts, and I commend him for that. I have a friend who voted Gary Johnson but wants Trump to, well, Make America Great Again.

 

Even if I was pessimistic on Hillary throughout the election, I would've wanted her to succeed.

 

What my issue here is that you had a lot of voters on either side that hated one candidate's guts and wouldn't swallow the bitter pill of that the other side has a different opinion. I sit center right politically, and while I may disagree with some leftist ideologies, I agree with others, especially when it comes down to LGBT rights. The problem is both sides have ideas that wouldn't work in the society we have, and that's where the big divide comes from. These people usually stoop to really shite insults, and what I'm saying is be better than that. Be sophisticated, use objective proof to prove someone wrong, or better yet, meet a compromise.

Not a perfect excuse, but it takes too long to type out every time what issue I'm talking about. I should do better though. There are some issues that do blanket all conservatives no matter what, especially fiscal issue and role of government. In relation to Trump, which is what my threads have been about, the blanket issue that he was a better option than Hillary, which is patently false. Hillary is fucking terrible. I don't want to live in a fucking oligarchy, but it's strange seeing people be mute about the things Trump is doing that are the reasons they claim they chose him over Hillary.

 

Why would you think I don't want Trump to succeed? I would say the "give him a chance" people were delusional. People were using this strange argument that he doesn't really mean what he says. I was against him even before he decided to run because I take at his word, you know, like lying about sending investigators to Kenya and them coming back with explosive news about Obama's origin. Let's even say I decided to give him a chance. He blew that with all of his cabinet picks. There is not a single reasonable one. Member when people said Obama acted like a king because of his executive orders? I member, even though his total and average were one of the lowest. Complete silence from those people when it's Trump.

 

I do use objective proof. All the time. Haven't you heard? The new things is calling everything that shatters your delusions "fake news." The usual rules don't apply anymore.

[revl8er]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

He supposedly wants to replace it with something better. If they can do it, I'm on board personally.

I'm all for it to.  All this Trump hate right now is tearing our country apart.  I think the man could find a cost effective cure for cancer and people would protest that he's taking money away from the pharmaceutical companies.  All I'm saying here is give the man a true chance to make a change in this country.  That's what we really need, and who knows perhaps in the long run you might actually like what he does.  And if you don't then go ahead and complain as it's your right as a citizen, but give the man at least a year to see what he can do.

[ivan134]

10 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

It is because it's for profit but simply shoving the cost on to someone else, either by tax or any other system still doesn't offset the costs.

 

Just "having" a free healthcare system in place that takes taxes to provide healthcare support to citizens out cannot work in our country.

Eh, debatable. I'm of the opinion 99.9% of you are unable to function without someone guiding you where to go because frankly, 99.9% of people on this planet are dumber than rocks.

 

Let's start with something small, let's make prostitution legal.

Yes, it does offset those costs because a lot of those costs wouldn't even exist in the 1st place if it weren't for a for profit system. Take for the example the ridiculous fact that pain is regarded as a sign in the U.S. You go in with a headache and you get told that you're going to die if you don't these opioids that are enough to knock out a full grown bull because insurance companies stand to profit from you getting addicted and coming back to them over and over.

[Guest Kloaked]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

In relation to Trump, which is what my threads have been about, the blanket issue that he was a better option than Hillary, which is patently false

Wrong.

 

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

I don't want to live in a fucking oligarchy, but it's strange seeing people be mute about the things Trump is doing that are the reasons they claim they chose him over Hillary.

Well if you would wake up and smell the bacon, you wouldn't be such a die hard believer of fake news.

 

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Why would you think I don't want Trump to succeed? I would say the "give him a chance" people were delusional. People were using this strange argument that he doesn't really mean what he says. I was against him even before he decided to run because I take at his word, you know, like lying about sending investigators to Kenya and them coming back with explosive news about Obama's origin. Let's even say I decided to give him a chance. He blew that with all of his cabinet picks. There is not a single reasonable one. Member when people said Obama acted like a king because of his executive orders? I member, even though his total and average were one of the lowest. Complete silence from those people when it's Trump.

Except the difference here is Trump is attempting to make the country safer (I already see you scoffing but that's alright - we're MAGA for you so shhh bb is ok) and more prosperous (really you don't have to make your scoffing so obvious).

 

Obama had his 8 years and a ton of his shortcomings were hidden behind fake news. Time for a change mate.

 

5 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I do use objective proof. All the time. Haven't you heard? The new things is calling everything that shatters your delusions "fake news." The usual rules don't apply anymore.

#FakeNews isn't objective proof.

 

Also, fake news isn't a delusion. It's been proven time and time again that many media outlets will intentionally spin stories in such a way to fit a specific narrative or even go as far as making up stories.

 

#HeWillNotDivideUs btw

 

Just now, revl8er said:

I'm all for it to.  All this Trump hate right now is tearing our country apart.  I think the man could find a cost effective cure for cancer and people would protest that he's taking money away from the pharmaceutical companies.  All I'm saying here is give the man a true chance to make a change in this country.  That's what we really need, and who knows perhaps in the long run you might actually like what he does.  And if you don't then go ahead and complain as it's your right as a citizen, but give the man at least a year to see what he can do.

 

Agreed.

[ivan134]

13 minutes ago, revl8er said:

Reasons being that Trump is the one who is trying to get rid of it.  They don't care that their prices are increasing because they are too focused on the Trump hate.  I doubt we will see a healthcare reform anytime soon in this country though because everyone is too focused on lining their pockets.  

False. Republicans have had 6 years to come up with a different solution. I'm for a single payer system because that has been proven to be what works best so it's not I'm defending Obamacare because I love it. The fact is that it is better than the garbage system we had before. What is Trump going to replace it with? What makes him an expert on healthcare policy and what has he figured out that no one else has? I'm not against him getting rid of it. I'm against him getting rid of it with nothing to replace it with yet. The second he presents another viable option I will be on board.

[Guest Kloaked]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Yes, it does offset those costs because a lot of those costs wouldn't even exist in the 1st place if it weren't for a for profit system. Take for the example the ridiculous fact that pain is regarded as a sign in the U.S. You go in with a headache and you get told that you're going to die if you don't these opioids that are enough to knock out a full grown bull because insurance companies stand to profit from you getting addicted and coming back to them over and over.

You really expect the people who are making advances in medical technology to not make the money that they can?

 

To quote you from earlier as my response

 

54 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

ROFL. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Is this real life?

this is more a serious issue than I thought.

Do you even economics?

[ivan134]

4 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

Wrong.

 

Well if you would wake up and smell the bacon, you wouldn't be such a die hard believer of fake news.

 

Except the difference here is Trump is attempting to make the country safer (I already see you scoffing but that's alright - we're MAGA for you so shhh bb is ok) and more prosperous (really you don't have to make your scoffing so obvious).

 

Obama had his 8 years and a ton of his shortcomings were hidden behind fake news. Time for a change mate.

 

#FakeNews isn't objective proof.

 

Also, fake news isn't a delusion. It's been proven time and time again that many media outlets will intentionally spin stories in such a way to fit a specific narrative or even go as far as making up stories.

 

#HeWillNotDivideUs btw

 

 

Agreed.

@Dan Castellaneta There you go. You try and tell me how objective proof works with someone who lives in an alternate universe where the biggest threat to the U.S. is some 5 year old kids running away from bombs and not white nationalists who have killed more Americans than any terrorist from the countries on the ban list.

[AlwaysFSX]

5 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Yes, it does offset those costs because a lot of those costs wouldn't even exist in the 1st place if it weren't for a for profit system. Take for the example the ridiculous fact that pain is regarded as a sign in the U.S. You go in with a headache and you get told that you're going to die if you don't these opioids that are enough to knock out a full grown bull because insurance companies stand to profit from you getting addicted and coming back to them over and over.

You are still so far off it's not even funny. But, you know all because you're so correct so who am I to tell you. /s

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

You are still so far off it's not even funny. But, you know all because you're so correct so who am I to tell you. /s

Nice rebuttal. Still waiting for what exactly is the root of all the problems.

[ivan134]

6 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

You really expect the people who are making advances in medical technology to not make the money that they can?

 

To quote you from earlier as my response

 

 

 

Do you even economics?

TIL insurance companies are the same as medical research companies.

[revl8er]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

TIL insurance companies are the same as medical research companies.

pharmaceutical companies raise their prices and in turn insurance companies follow suit.  It's pretty much common sense.  

[ivan134]

4 minutes ago, revl8er said:

pharmaceutical companies raise their prices and in turn insurance companies follow suit.  It's pretty much common sense.  

What makes you think pharmaceutical companies aren't making money in countries with single payer healthcare?

[Guest Kloaked]

3 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

What makes you think pharmaceutical companies aren't making money in countries with single payer healthcare?

Our culture, politics, everything about our country does not function the same way other countries do, which is why the shit other countries do most likely will not work here.

 

Do you history?

[revl8er]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

What makes you think pharmaceutical companies aren't making money in countries with single payer healthcare?

There's a reason people go to Mexico or Canada for cheaper medicine.  The prices are so ridiculous in the US that it's maddening.  

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, revl8er said:

There's a reason people go to Mexico or Canada for cheaper medicine.  The prices are so ridiculous in the US that it's maddening.  

You basically just made his point for him, lol.

[ivan134]

3 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

Our culture, politics, everything about our country does not function the same way other countries do, which is why the shit other countries do most likely will not work here.

 

Do you history?

Give some examples

[PlayStation 2]

8 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Not a perfect excuse, but it takes too long to type out every time what issue I'm talking about. I should do better though. There are some issues that do blanket all conservatives no matter what, especially fiscal issue and role of government. In relation to Trump, which is what my threads have been about, the blanket issue that he was a better option than Hillary, which is patently false. Hillary is fucking terrible. I don't want to live in a fucking oligarchy, but it's strange seeing people be mute about the things Trump is doing that are the reasons they claim they chose him over Hillary.

 

Why would you think I don't want Trump to succeed? I would say the "give him a chance" people were delusional. People were using this strange argument that he doesn't really mean what he says. I was against him even before he decided to run because I take at his word, you know, like lying about sending investigators to Kenya and them coming back with explosive news about Obama's origin. Let's even say I decided to give him a chance. He blew that with all of his cabinet picks. There is not a single reasonable one. Member when people said Obama acted like a king because of his executive orders? I member, even though his total and average were one of the lowest. Complete silence from those people when it's Trump.

 

I do use objective proof. All the time. Haven't you heard? The new things is calling everything that shatters your delusions "fake news." The usual rules don't apply anymore.

I could also blanket liberals if that's what you're going for. Equality for everyone is sadly just not there for the radical far-leftists. I'm not saying you are at all, but it's basically "if you're white, fuck you". It's the opposite of the radical far-rightists. And that's a problem with the LGBT community. A lot of them are pretty far-left, and they live in this fantasy world where everything's perfect. I'm gay, but I'm also a Mexican who was born and raised in Southern California coming from basically nothing of real value. I know the world is far from perfect and never would be close to being perfect. 

 

I should bring this up, too. We both see two different versions of America. I come from parents who mainly delved into politics in the Bill Clinton presidency, and started looking back on the Ronald Reagan presidency and would see how the W. Bush and Obama presidencies played out for them. Being from a military family from that era, that already divides our political vision further. We're bound to disagree a lot. And it's why I'm not going to trash you, but simply call it how I see it. If you see it differently, well, you see it differently. No big deal.

 

But since I'm reasonable, I won't blanket liberals. It's unfair, especially to my boyfriend, because while he's farther left than I am, he, and millions of other center leftists, have a grasp on reality and know it's not perfect. We managed to come to a compromise, and we're both disgusted as to what the far left has crumpled to.

 

I never implied that you didn't want Trump to succeed. I said I commended voters who wanted Trump to succeed despite their political stance.

 

I'm not going to scream and shout about what Trump's doing, but with the immigration laws, at least, I actually think they're a fair compromise. Bill Clinton and Barack Obama both brought up the same issue, it's just that it's far more audible because this is Trump. The seven banned countries are what Obama listed in 2015. And with the media calling it a "Muslim ban", it's not. If it was, Indonesia, India, Lebanon, Egypt, etc. would be on that list too. 

 

I don't really care too much about "the mainstream media", but I'd like to point out that CNN and ABC basically spent the election night fear mongering over Trump. Especially Van Jones on CNN, who called it a "whitelash" because Trump stole Pennsylvania's vote. But implying that Trump isn't intelligent is real unfair to him. It'd also be unfair to say Obama was an idiot, too. Sure, I don't think he did a great job in his presidency, but he's not an idiot either.

 

12 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

@Dan Castellaneta There you go. You try and tell me how objective proof works with someone who lives in an alternate universe where the biggest threat to the U.S. is some 5 year old kids running away from bombs and not white nationalists who have killed more Americans than any terrorist from the countries on the ban list.

Me and @Kloaked aren't the same person, and there's no reason to act like we are. Islamic terrorism has been a problem since the 1980s, and ever since 9/11, there's been more in the way of radical Islamic terrorism. Yes, we have problems within our own country, and that's a different manner entirely. But if we can at least halt some source of terrorism, it'd be better than leaving it be.

[Guest Kloaked]

3 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Give some examples

Take a look at why the founding fathers intended for the country to be the way that it is. Straying from that would be moronic.

 

http://factmyth.com/why-did-the-founding-fathers-choose-a-republic/

[stconquest]

12 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Give some examples

There are none, at least not any real ones.

 

If something works, it works.  American exceptionalism does not make that which is wrong, magically right.

 

Healthcare is a perfect example.  The right way is to develop a way to meet the needs of the people, all the people.  Any profit made goes back into the system to hire more workers, improve facilities and even dish out grants for medical research.

 

The wrong way is to give the profits to greedy corporations.

 

This should not be a debate topic because all necessary data is available.  For-profit basic healthcare is a big mistake, but American exceptionalism says everyone else is wrong.