Because someone needs to be enslaved to provide universial health care. If even one person wants to opt out, no matter how wrong their reason you if you allow don’t allow it they are enslaved.
Congratulations, you just said the dumbest thing I’ve read on the Internet in a very long time. That’s impressive!
I pay for the military, for roads, for schools, for police, for fire departments…and I can’t opt out of any of that. So am I already a slave? If so, then I might as well get some healthcare out of the deal.
If I’m not already a slave then universal healthcare isn’t making me a slave either. No one would be forcing you to use your healthcare either.
I’ve been wondering for a bit why during the time the Democrats controlled the legislature, executive, and judicial branches during Obama’s first term in 2008 more wasn’t accomplished. Shouldn’t that have been the opportunity to make Row V Way law and fix the electoral college? I understand the recession was going on but...
Oh did Democrats stop the Republicans when the winds shifted?
Oh no they didn’t. They went along with them.
What the hell are you talking about? Your comment is entirely divorced from reality. There were 175 cloture votes to break a filibuster on nominees during the Obama administration and 314 during Trump. Nearly doubled in half the time.
When Schumer was minority leader, he vigorously used the filibuster to do just that. Under his leadership, Democrats used the filibuster to block funding for construction of Trump’s border wall in 2019. They used it not once, but twice to impede passage of the Cares Act — forcing Republicans to agree to changes including a $600 weekly federal unemployment supplement. They used it in September and October to stop Republicans from passing further coronavirus relief before the November election. They used it to halt Sen. Tim Scott’s (R-S.C.) police reform legislation so Republicans could not claim credit for forging a bipartisan response to the concerns of racial justice protesters. They used it to block legislation to force “sanctuary cities” to cooperate with federal officials, and to stop a prohibition on taxpayer funding of abortion, bans on abortions once the unborn child is capable of feeling pain, and protections for the lives of babies born alive after botched abortions. - Washington Post
China is subsidizing EV production and selling cars below cost. Allowing them to be sold in the US would kill the domestic EV market. How is that better for Americans?
For a few years, until the American automakers go bankrupt, as you said, then the Chinese automakers increase prices 10x.
…and the legacy auto industry gets taught a valuable lesson as companies who refused to modernize go bankrupt.
What a valuable lesson, get subsidized by an authoritarian government so that you can offer vehicles below cost. Also be sure to add spyware for the aforementioned authoritarian government.
Do you even understand what below cost means? No amount of modernization will counteract it.
You’re saying “they”, but it’s you. And no you didn’t, repeating what you said before isn’t addressing the issues.
Adressed twice.
Never addressed at all, you pivoted to the oil industry. You didn’t address the subsidies from China or the unfair trade practices.
America will not subsidize to that level, if they could, and no amount of innovation is going to combat subsidization or the unfair trade practices.
According to a Bloomberg article, China will sell EVs at under $10,000, undercutting the price of the average American EV by $50,000. Are you seriously arguing that “investment to lower cost” will reduce the cost by 85-90%? That’s simply a ludicrous assertion.
You think US products won’t have spyware?
I don’t think that collecting anonymized usage data, is the same as unlimited spying going back to an authoritarian government. So no, absolutely nothing comparable.
Honestly, everything you have said is dishonest and/or disingenuous. The idea that the price of the vehicle is going to be reduced by 90% as a result of subsidies and innovation is both stupid and dishonest. You should also look up the definition of authoritarian.
During the last ‘election summer’ things went haywire but ultimately nothing meaningful really happened, and not a whole lot really changed as a result of that unrest. This time things are going haywire again, and it seems like something big will happen but people thought that the last time… Would it just be better to...
I don’t pay attention to the news (haven’t for many years now) and I firmly believe it’s okay that I don’t.
I also don’t vote because, at this point, I’d consider myself the definition of an uninformed voter.
You’re essentially keeping yourself ignorant, and then saying you’re too ignorant to take action. Just ridiculous.
So much of what’s presented by the media doesn’t impact my day-to-day life in the slightest.
Trump was elected and as a direct result: Roe was overturned, pregnant women are having their lives risked over non-viable pregnancies, others are forced to have children they don’t want, gun control has been struck down, Christian Nationalism is heavily asserting itself at a time when fewer and fewer people are religious, the pandemic was bungled leading to thousands and thousands of unnecessary deaths, $2t was given away to the uber-wealthy, air and water quality standards were rolled back, ultra-conservative judges have been instituting national bans from the 5th circuit, gay and trans rights have been rolled back…and on and on…and that’s without getting to all the states banning books and destroying the social safety net.
I guess you could not be a woman, not know a woman, not care about getting shot, or know anyone who you don’t want to see get shot, like oppressive religious tenets foisted upon you, not worry about dying of communicable disease, or know anyone that you wouldn’t want to see die of communicable disease, be ok with your tax dollars being given to the rich, and not be gay or trans or care about anyone who is…but you must at least breath air and drink water, right?
It all affects you, you’re just too ignorant to realize how. Your apathy and indifference are what allows shitty people to hurt others. But if you don’t care about that, no one can force you.
I think the best analogy I’ve heard had compared voting to transportation. If you’re at the office and want to go home, there probably isn’t a train that goes directly to your front door. So you get on the train heading in the right direction, and maybe at the end of that line you still need to take a bus and walk a couple blocks, but that’s how you ultimately get where you want to go. Otherwise you’re going to be in the same spot waiting for a perfect train that’s not coming.
Donald Trump‘s inner circle doesn’t expect the Supreme Court to go along with his extreme arguments about executive power in the immunity case before the justices. But what the high court does now is almost beside the point: Trump already won....
How would that even work? Do murderers not get an attorney any longer? Who’s harm should we consider? I have to represent my clients’ interests, period.
The issue with the law is the delay. If I take a civil case to trial it has usually taken 3-5 years. And five years isn’t nearly the longest case I’ve had. Spend more money, have more judges, fewer delays, but that costs money and we’ve been cutting taxes for 40+ years now.
I’m not sure they could though. They could probably waive his ability to pledge the stock as collateral, but not sale. Ultimately, the board has a fiduciary duty to the shareholders and I’m not sure there’s a conceivable reason they could come up with that’s in the shareholders interest. Power to do it, sure, but they’re going to be defendants in a shareholder derivative suit.
Things can be electronically filed through Pacer 24 hours per day. Depending on the local rules there may be a cutoff for what is considered timely that day, but it’s usually after close of business. I wouldn’t expect any action on this today.
I hear this opinion a lot, and I always ask what specifically would you have them do? They don’t control the house, so if they can’t get Republicans to go along they can’t pass any legislation. That’s just reality.
When they didn’t avoid the situation that allowed turtleman to obstruct Obama’s nomination for almost a year by not beinging it before the Senate in a blatant abuse of power.
Avoid it how? What specifically would you have liked them to do?
So you are completely ignorant as to how Congress functions, but you’re also somehow positive they could have done something? That’s such confused thinking. Perhaps figure out what could have been done before complaining that it wasn’t done.
I’m sorry, but the Republicans would have fucking just steamrolled the parliamentarian, and the fact that the Democrats wouldn’t shows their milquetoast, waffling, ineffectual cowardice.
So they should have violated the rules of the Senate? They have a razor thin majority, 48 Dems and 3 independents. You would need all of them to be willing to violate the Senate rules to pass immigration as a reconciliation bill.
We could also talk about the recent immigration bill
So you go from being upset that they didn’t try to pass an immigration bill to upset that they did. The Democrats negotiated with Republicans to achieve one of two outcomes, either the Republicans go along with it and it removes the issue from the election or the Republicans torpedo it and they go into the election season having been given everything they wanted and refused it. It’s gamesmanship.
There was also the unwillingness to prosecute Bush & Cheney for war crimes.
And what court exactly would have allowed the destruction of presidential immunity for official presidential acts? The correct answer is none.
Democrats have literally spent my entire adult life PRETENDING that Republicans are operating in good faith when every available piece of evidence screams bloody murder that the Republicans are not acting in good faith.
Who has claimed this? The Republicans have become a party of obstructionism. They do not care if the government functions. That means they aren’t willing to compromise and they will use every lever of government to sabotage any work done.
If the Republicans control either chamber of the legislature, nothing can get done. If there is a republican president, nothing will get done. Your solutions are ill conceived and don’t address reality. If you just want to be angry, go ahead. Throw in a “both sides are the same” while you’re at it. I prefer pragmatism and reality.
They could have “convinced” Mitch McConnell not to block the nomination by any thousands of legal, illegal, and extra-legal means.
No, they couldn’t.
All I’m saying is, when corporate America is in trouble, it truly seems like anything is possible.
Yes, because Democrats want to help people, and Republicans only care about ultra wealthy people and corporations. Corporate America is the overlap in this particular Venn diagram.
When actual American lives are at stake, they just shrug and bemoan the rules they’re in charge of making and enforcing.
Republicans do that and block help. See Republicans with the recent bridge collapse all the way back to super storm Sandy.
Those entrenched have everyone saying it is never the right time to get off their train, so when is the time?
Did you even read my previous comment, or just respond? I literally said you need to organize at the grassroots, get state reps and senators, and Congress members. You need to build the change, not just snap your fingers. A third-party president would accomplish nothing.
If you are a Libertarian and hold liberty as your core value, why do you not believe in universal healthcare? Nothing impacts liberty more than sickness and death.
Why Didn't Democrats Do More When They Controlled Both Houses of Legislature, The White House, and The Supreme Court During Obama's First Term?
I’ve been wondering for a bit why during the time the Democrats controlled the legislature, executive, and judicial branches during Obama’s first term in 2008 more wasn’t accomplished. Shouldn’t that have been the opportunity to make Row V Way law and fix the electoral college? I understand the recession was going on but...
How big is this dog? (slrpnk.net)
Biden really, really doesn’t want China to flood the US with cheap EVs (www.theverge.com)
Jack Dorsey departs Bluesky board | TechCrunch (techcrunch.com)
Should I avoid or engage in current news right now?
During the last ‘election summer’ things went haywire but ultimately nothing meaningful really happened, and not a whole lot really changed as a result of that unrest. This time things are going haywire again, and it seems like something big will happen but people thought that the last time… Would it just be better to...
this post commits the cardinal internet sin of having nuance sorry :( (lemmy.cafe)
Team Trump Is Ready to Lose the Supreme Court Immunity Case. They're Celebrating (www.rollingstone.com)
Donald Trump‘s inner circle doesn’t expect the Supreme Court to go along with his extreme arguments about executive power in the immunity case before the justices. But what the high court does now is almost beside the point: Trump already won....
4K Chromecast with Google TV sequel is coming with new remote (9to5google.com)
Narcissistic conservative parent Facebook is wild (lemmy.world)
Trump Media plunges amid plan to issue more shares. It's lost $7 billion in value since its peak. (www.cbsnews.com)
Donald Trump to reveal bond details as Letitia James poised to strike (www.newsweek.com)
Lawsuit asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to strike down governor's 400-year veto (apnews.com)
"Rust" armorer Hannah Gutierrez-Reed sentenced to 18 months in prison over deadly 2021 shooting (www.cbsnews.com)
Justice Clarence Thomas misses Supreme Court arguments (www.nbcnews.com)
The conservative justice was not present for oral arguments on Monday, but the court did not provide a reason why....
I can excuse genocide but I draw the line at voting third party (lemmy.world)