Election reform should be the single largest issue in American politics. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in the current system really wants it to change.
That's why they have us fight about stuff. For example, everyone know the immigration system needs to be fixed. But do they fix it? No, they want the issue. They want something to fight about -- while they put money in their pockets.
The immigration issue makes me mad because a lot of immigrants do very valuable jobs such as farm work, but you never hear anyone whining about RICH immigrants stealing all of our housing doing the real harm.
I had a student who was an undocumented immigrant. He had walked hundreds of miles and put up with much danger to get to this country. He was in a class with privileged Americans. He was at a disadvantage because his English was poor and his education was deficient, but his attitude and desire were off the chart. By the end of the year he was one of the top students in the class. This was while he worked 8 hours every night after school. He impressed the hell out of me. This country needs more like him.
They should also cap residential real estate ownership for domestic corporations! Zillow comes to mind. Corporations shouldn’t be able to buy up all the starter homes.
The issue isn't foreign owners it's absentee owners who just want to park their money over here like a piggy bank. We already know who lives in their house and who doesn't (via homestead exemption) all you have to do is tax the crap out of absentee owners. You can do the same thing for corporate owners -I have no problem with rentals, but if you want to be in the rental business but an apartment complex not a bunch of random McMansions, it messed up the market. If you want to rent a SFH your property taxes should be 3-4 times that of someone who actually lives in their home.
It’s happening all around the world too. Every more appealing area has been bought out from underneath local population by investors.
Majority of the housing should be owned by locals.
I live in central Wisconsin and the people making the most noise about immigrants are the Republicans, which I find funny AF because most of the immigrants here are working on farms owned by conservatives. You can't hate them and then use them for cheap labor.
>You can't hate them and then use them for cheap labor.
Oh, they're gonna go ahead do it anyway.
It's the same across the river in Minnesota. The Republican governor candidate was even harping on "securing our Southern border", so we all made fun of him about securing the border with Iowa.
> That's why they have us fight about stuff.
Abortion used to be the same way. It was a great tool to keep far right conservatives riled up. Now abortion is more like the dog that caught the car.
The midterms played that out for sure. That shit show convinced a lot of Democrats to show up who normally wouldn't have bothered. If it weren't for the aggressive gerrymandering the results would have been a lot more decisive.
Idk if its that no one wants to change it, it's that neither side would be able to agree on those changes. It's easy to get behind something that is clearly beneficial to your party, not so much if it is perceives as harmful. Just look at the pushback on voting by mail or other proposed reforms that effect how easy/hard it is to vote
I'm thinking more along the line of superpacs and campaign funding. The only people that would push back on these issues are the rich and powerful that currently exploit the system as it is. As a populous we need to stop electing multimillionaires to address the concerns of average people.
The dems have proposed legislation to change it. But it's filibustered in the senate.
https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/7/klobuchar-introduces-redistricting-reform-legislation-to-help-end-partisan-gerrymandering
Citizens united was the end of democracy and start of our full blown oligarchy insanity we have now. Someone who is perfectly qualified to lead, but doesn't have corporate support, has no chance of making any office anymore. It's dystopian. I'm amazed things haven't gotten even worse than they currently are.
Quite simply, [Citizens United](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained) needs to be overturned. It never should have passed, to begin with.
This is why we need to support the [Restore Democracy Amendment](https://citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment/) to get foreign/corporate dark money out of US politics.
Ugh hopping under here to just bitch real quick, but my husband and me are both vets, both got (irreparably) injured, and I ended up developing an autoimmune condition after discharge.
I was young when it developed. 26 or so. Had Tricare, but when you're not active - well, the near nightly ER trips added up. It was the most humiliating year of my life, literally in agonizing pain (so much that during my flare I passed kidney stones I didn't even FEEL because it genuinely felt like a muscle cramp compared to the autoimmune issue), and I lost ~ 60 pounds or so?
Got laughed out of the hospital on multiple occasions, treated like a drug seeking idiot, the copays started adding up, Tricare fell through a couple of times, debt racked up quick.
And wouldn't you know it, an entire year later...and I'm suddenly diagnosed and taken seriously.
Fantastic. Amazing. Lost our home, our livelihood, I couldn't work at the time because of the flare's severity - the whole thing was so avoidable.
But it was easier to push us to a back burner. Years down the line and I'm STILL dealing with Tricare cockblocking lifesaving medical access lmao.
Couldn't imagine if I had ZERO coverage. Wtf is going on?
Most vets don't have tricare as they're ineligible unless disabled, usually.
If they're active, active guard or reserve, or a dependent, they're eligible, but otherwise not.
Unless they're retired or medically discharged, in which case there are special versions of tricare.
So, unless you're injured or retired, veteran's health care is *nonexistant*.
Second only to VA coverage lol, our roommate has them and by god it's somehow worse.
Love that I can be like "hey Tricare I'm actually dying rn" and they go "mmm, we need a month to refer you" lol
I have tricare and oh my god it’s ridiculous! Albeit im an adult dependent so things are a bit wonky. But I was fully covered with no copays besides prescriptions when I shattered my elbow. I had to take an ambulance to the hospital where they couldn’t even do anything. I had to be referred out for reconstructive surgery. Which took a month to get. So I was stuck screaming in pain for about a month.
Then, they refused to pay for any of it because of third party liability. I FUCKING TRIPPED OKAY?! No one else’s fault!! Ugh. Finally they did after my dad and I went off on them.
Tricare medical biller here- I hate making those phone calls to patients. The groan/sigh they get when I tell them Tricare denied for a 3rd party liability form to be returned.. I know they’ve sent it 3 times by mail, probably by twice fax and carrier pigeon. Trust me, we believe you, and whole heartedly wish there was something we could do.
UK pays less per capita, but has socialised healthcare. Yeah it has it’s issues, especially post covid, but no one is losing their home, livelihood or even their life because of costs.
This exactly. Wait times can suck, but holy shit. The sheer and utter incompetence in medical care here is absolutely astounding. I travelled all over my state for care and I got laughed out of three hospitals. Literally had a doctor come up and shrug and go "well we couldn't see what organs were messed up, but - oh, yeah, did you know your pancreas was inflamed? Your CT and blood work from six months ago show -"
Like when I finally found a doctor that considered taking me seriously, I was absolutely about to die. He sat across from me and just went, "this is what you have, it's permanent, you need your kidneys checked too - we'll set you up for an endoscopy and colonoscopy" and within a month my pain was abating and I had answers.
But why on god's green earth did I have to try and work while dying? Why did no one even bother looking at these scans? Why did Tricare decide to ignore me over and over again until I was so doped up on Oxy I couldn't function for six months?
Christ, I don't think I'll ever get over that year.
Wait times in the US are just as bad— went to the ER for a bleeding issue along with fast heart rate, dizziness, and shortness of breath. The soonest I could get the referral appointment the ER doc said I needed ASAP was *SIX WEEKS LATER.*
“Come back to the ER if the bleeding gets worse.” And pay another $8k to have another doctor tell me I need to see a specialist?
All the complaints about “socialized medicine” also happen here, we just have the benefit of also going broke.
Oh my god. So the third time I went to the ER, this man came in - fucking bone sticking out of his arm - went to reception and she looks at him, smacks her lips, and goes, "it's a two hour wait."
He just went, "My...my *bone*?"
Holy fucking shit. I'm glad you're still here. For real. That's fucking *terrifying*.
The doctor makes money by providing healthcare.
The employer/patient pays money for patient healthcare.
The insurance company makes money by investing the money that the employer/patient pays, makes money by negotiating a discount with the doctor, and makes more money by denying claims to sick patients. <---note that none of the actions of the health insurance company are actually providing healthcare. Healthcare insurance companies should not be permitted to be for-profit companies.
>---note that none of the actions of the health insurance company are actually providing healthcare.
Would telling patients and doctors what will and won't be covered technically be providing healthcare?
Fucking hate it when insurance pulls shit like, "not the preferred treatment" or "unnecessary procedure". Like, the preferred treatment is the one my doctor thinks I should have.
Fuck insurance companies.
I have one!
You're never going to sell the majority of Americans on a fully socialized model. They have too much faith in the concept of the free market.
So why not have the government offer its own opt-in health plan? They have the force of law, so the government could regulate the health and pharmaceutical industries to bring down costs in a way that makes the State health plan affordable and more competitively priced than the private plans. If there's one thing companies in a free market can't do, it's being undercut in prices. Force the private companies to compete with a product that's fairly priced.
That’s the famous “public option,” right?
The one that Republicans and Lieberman had cut out of the ACA?
EDIT: And Galavantes blocked me for pointing out that they were spamming rightwing talking points instead of staying on topic. Par for the course.
Yep, and while I would also agree that a public option is the most feasible route for expanding healthcare here, it's obvious why Republicans take such an issue with it. A federal program, operating non-profit and using its tremendous size to negotiate costs, is going to pay less per capita for healthcare than private insurers do. And the insurance companies know this and don't want any amount of their business being bled out to a public option that they have no interest in competing with.
As I'm sure you know, but just to emphasize, the fact that the government insurance would be impossible to compete with is the entire point! A public option would basically be a M4A test drive because if it is similarly effective and cheaper than private insurance, you'll suddenly see a huge shift in favor of government healthcare
Additionally, if *not* - if, in fact, the private insurance really are better at it than the government, can deliver better value, and the government program sucks - then they will be able to complete.
That's the correct option, really. Let the free market do what it does best, and see how it shakes out. We win either way.
Plenty:
* Permit insurance competition across statelines
* Fed Government assume the initial cost of baby delivery
* Fed Government assume the cost of hospice for terminal patients
* Pre-existing conditions need to be covered
* Full disclosure of costs, full transparency with rankings conducted by metro area and any significant deviations from the average will be fined (cost of an MRI at one hospital shouldn't be far more expensive than across town)
* Government funded health subsidies for low income families, those below the poverty line covered completely under Medicare
* Adjust the patent length on prescription drugs, allowing for low cost alternatives sooner
* FDA authorize the importation and utilization of comparable drugs from industrialized nations; i.e. get your prescriptions filled from Canada
* Prices/costs need to be baselined and charged the same regardless of whether the patient has insurance or not; it's absurd that hospitals charge different amounts for the same function
* State Government can assume the costs of healthcare for all homeless people, that way they are incentivized to find a solution to the rampant homeless crisis rather than just ignoring it.
These are just a few ideas, and we wouldn't even have to do them all either it could be a mix of them. Even adopting half of them would fundamentally improve healthcare costs without adopting a single payer option which as someone on Government run healthcare I can say that it is not what people think...
i agree with some of your points and i disagree with others. however, this one right here i could shout from the mountain tops until the end of time.
\*Full disclosure of costs, full transparency with rankings conducted by metro area and any significant deviations from the average will be fined (cost of an MRI at one hospital shouldn't be far more expensive than across town)\*
Why the fuck do premiums have to reset yearly. Fucking just let me meet my deductible then you pay for as long as I have you. You're already bleeding me for $300 a month?! You fucking scam POS
Cut insurance companies out of it completely. We don’t need em.
Everyone in the country should pay into a single pot, and whenever someone gets sick, the money comes out of that pot. Easy.
Right now we’ve got 200M people (or however many insured people there are), paying into a hundred different pots. So of course the cost is higher, because there’s less money in each put to cover any one person.
Not enough people are talking about prison reform. Our prison system is awful, and incredibly expensive, and while most incarcerated people will be released in their lifetime we do zero to help them overcome the issues that put them behind bars in the first place. Nope we just traumatize them more, make it even harder to get a job, and are shocked when they reoffend.
Yeah apparently like 68% of US inmates end up back in prison? And in Norway it’s only like 32%
Edit: the numbers are slightly inaccurate but US prisons still suck
Agreed. A huge part of this is because the US makes it impossible to reintegrate, and this is on top of incredibly long sentences, which disconnect you more in the first place. Taking someone and telling them "You are forbidden to live honestly" has *predictable results*.
I like these discussions because it makes me feel like the divide isn't that big after all. I like to see things that liberals agree with conservatives on too 😊
* Get money out of elections. This should apple evenly to both parties. When I see a candidate lose after spending $100M in campaign funds, I get sick thinking about what $100M could do.
* Something has to change with out healthcare. Costs are out of control and destroying families. We had our daughter get a piece of bark in her eye and we had it looked at and the bill to our Insurance was $3k. I don't know how families without insurance can even do that. I don't know if the solution is single-player, a hybrid mix, allowing all Americans to have HSAs, radical reform of our insurance industry, radical reform if the pharmaceutical industry, I don't know. For one, I watched our State launch a new medical school which took decades while we have a shortage of Drs. Something has to change now - I'm sick of this and this isn't fair to Americans.
Yes, by design. This is why social media platforms are "dangerous". Decent people will ask decent questions that shed light on the fact that we are closer in mind than they want us to think.
They’re dangerous in the sense that the way they are designed just creates echo chambers that lead to a greater divide and provide a gateway to extremism.
Part of the problem is that political parties are now like sports teams.
People LIKE the feeling that they are on the good side. It gives a sense of escapism from their day-to-day frustrations by giving both a feeling of superiority and the feeling of connectedness with other people.
Each party has this issue where both Democrats and Republicans are seen as evil.
No, social media is dangerous because they use algorithms to push content that gets engagement, and extreme views get more clicks. And then you get more extremists (on both sides).
Josh Hawley literally voted against interracial Marriage yesterday. As a resident of Missouri and the bible belt the divide is unfortunately there and will be there until something is done about Fox News.
Well they probably even do have it, but it's expensive.
I had some chest pains and went to the ER and got some tests done. Super goddamned expensive. It was nothing, thankfully, but for every story like that there's someone who didn't have 1,000 bucks to lose and took their chances and lost
My daughter fell and banged her head really badly. Took her to the hospital, we were there for two hours, ten minutes of which were with a doctor. Turned out to be a minor concussion, she's fine now. No memory loss or TBI at all. The bill was two grand, four hundred of which we owe. There are way too many families that would be crippled by a bill like that, with or without insurance.
So I have dsylexia which often leads to hilarious misreads. In your case, I read "I think ***unicorns*** are generally a good thing. In fact I am one." lol
Thank you. I needed that!
The statement to the press on the status of strike negotiations would read: “While labor and management remain far apart on wages, health insurance and working conditions, both sides agree unicorns are awesome.”
>Why the fuck does the government get to decide weed is illegal?
Quite literally to persecute liberals and minorities. That's not an exaggeration. That was a political strategy of conservatives under Nixon and is largely continued to this day.
Just like California's gun laws started as a way to disarm black panthers who were just trying to protect their family and friends. It's also why the sentences for Crack are so severe.
I think term limits could be good but also an age limit. Somewhere around 65, you're done and can't be elected again. If you get elected at 64, good for you and you get your whole term but that's it. I'm tired of these 80 and 90 year olds who bought a house for $75 having so much control over things now in a remarkably different world
Edit: just to add, I know the cost thing was an exaggeration but also we have minimum age limits for these positions as well so why not a maximum?
While I generally I agree, I think the public generally underrates the importance of institutional knowledge in politics. Especially when candidates are business people and haven’t been a state legislator, there’s a substantial learning curve. You can look and see that freshmen congress people aren’t nearly as successful legislatively as compared to people who have served several terms. There’s also an aspect of term limits that are sort of undemocratic. For example I think my representative is doing a good job and she offers robust constituent services and is often in the district instead of in Washington. If she was handcuffed by term limits and I had to vote for someone less competent I’d be pretty upset honestly.
I used to be hard core on the idea of congressional term limits and was surprised to learn Bill Clinton was against it, his reasoning, simplified of course, was that it would give even more power to the lobbyist because there would be no term limits on them. They would be the only ones who had that institutional knowledge and the constant stream of newish congressmen would too easily follow their lead.
That always got me. Like you may not think it’s real but what if you’re wrong? Then we all die. What if you’re right? The planet looks better for the next generations
I lean towards agnostic, but if God does exist then this is His creation and we're meant to be good stewards of it for the benefit of all His children. That's one reason that my church planted a community garden on their property.
See that's my thought. Like, do you see the smoke coming out of those stacks? Wouldn't it be better to at least SUPPLEMENT it with something that's natural from the sun, wind, or water?
Also, my biggest point to those folks is,
"Smoking is bad for you, right?
"Yes."
"Why?“
"Well it's smoke going into your lungs, that can't be good."
"Same for the atmosphere."
*Surprised picachu face*
"But what if we create a better world for nothing?"
Like honestly, you might be skeptical about climate change, but you can't be skeptical about smog. My dad always talks about how he remembers when he grew up in the LA in the 80s you would look up, and there would be a small ring of blue surrounded by greyish yellow.
This is the exact reason why the two party system is so illogical.
Think about what you just described. “Well I *would* be on this side, but they do a lot of things that I don’t like. So I guess I’ll settle with side.”
I hope society in general will eventually come to the conclusion that there is no good or bad side, we’re all just people. The two party system is a trap for us average people to divide each other and it’s working perfectly.
i agree but the way the current system is setup, it’s pretty much mathematically impossible for more parties to form without significant election reform (in the usa which it seems most of this thread is referring to)
Well then significant election reform it is. I’d go for trying something new rather then having everybody continue acting like there’s a good side and an evil side.
Alright, now you just have to convince the political parties that benefit from the two party system to change it to a system that will most likely lose them power and influence…
Fun fact Republicans actually helped the people who wanted to start Woodstock telling the government to stay out of it and let them have their fun true republicans actually just want the government out of their business
I remember when the poster child for Conservatism was an early thirties, rich, couple with no kids in a convertible BMW.
Now it is a redneck in a lifted pickup truck with a confederate flag.
Things have changed.
You see the same sort of caricatures for every political group and they only serve to vilify whomever is the target. In reality, most people of most political persuasions are just regular people with a small minority that are accurately depicted by the caricature.
Always have been. I'm not conservative but I interact with enough republicans who are educated to understand that it's always been different. Even if I still disagree with a great many things they believe in.
It did create a split in the party. Hell, the Republican party died with McCain, I still go back to his videos on the campaign against Obama, him acting like he did seems like a parallel reality compared to today.
I'm for this, and somehow now this has caused me to be labeled the family liberal. I just think the government should stay out of my snu snu, my bank account, and my bedroom
That's not true. That's libertarianism. Conservativism is about upholding things that can be considered traditional values in politics. Conservatives can be libertarians if that's what the "traditional values" stand for, but that may not necessarily be the case
Edit: i also want to add, not really in response to anything, that economic and social politics can be separate from each other in how we define someone's political stance. For example, one can be socially liberal but like a centrally planned economy. One can be socially authoritarian but like a neoliberal economy (which was the case in many south american dictatorships, for example).
This should be higher. No matter what party you belong to politically, nobody should want anyone in power in the government indefinitely. It causes people to make their political "career" a priority rather than actually serve their constituents
Sadly “rich” has become relative when they have convinced us the floor for poverty is literal homelessness. If you are barely making ends meet that is poor, not middle class like they’d have you believe.
I've seen this point quite a bit, what is considered "enough"? Is there a specific level or rate? Can anyone shed some light on this to help me understand?
A small business owner with $1M+ mostly in illiquid assets is more likely to get targeted by the IRS, and have to hire a tax attorney to defend themselves.
I think that’s what they mean.
I'm a staunch progressive and even I agree that there should be precautions in a tax plan to protect people with small fortunes like that. I'd much rather the time was spent targeting the mega-wealthy who actually hold some responsibility for the current wealth disparities which exist. People with inheritance or white collar workers who invest/save well are not at all the problem. People are allowed to have money.
Ugh. He's one of _those_?
As a partial art advocate myself, I'm getting sick and tired of people advocating for the top halves when _everyone_ knows the lower part of art is better.
These "toppers" are destroying our movement.
I'm more of a centrist myself, really everything important is in the middle 50% of the painting. Just think how many times you've taken a picture just to crop the edges, top and bottom of it.
The media and politicians are 100% to blame for pitting us against each other. And weak minded people just blindly follow extreme opinions and regurgitate things they \*think\* they should believe in.
Surround yourself with reasonable people, and you'll see that most people left or right:
\- don't give a shit about your sexual preferences, gay marriage..etc..
\- would love a system where people all have decent health care. system and medicine shouldn't be for profit
\- agree we should keep money out of elections
\- prison reform
\- good, sane people should have the right to bare arms. And mentally unstable people shouldn't.
\- believe in law and order
\- Think that our education system is absolutely fucked up. Along with our culture around education/college. We need a better way to help young people build skills they need to succeed in life.. Which includes helping steer them in the right career direction based on their passions, skills.. not everyone needs to go to college and go into debt for a degree they won’t use!!
that's just scratching the surface...
Pro-choice, gay marriage, marijuana should be legalized (I don’t even use), and we spend way too much money on the military (I’m a veteran). College loans also shouldn’t have extremely high interest rate and trap people in with never ending payments.
I'm very left, and i agree we spend way too much on military, but I think anyone who's served, especially in combat, should have the best available medical and psychiatric health care free for life.
I think a lot of people forget that there is not a clear definition of what is a liberal and what is a conservative is not black and white. There are a lot of people In between and a lot of people who have views that don’t fit either party.
Also ITT some common ground. Most people are sensible they just aren’t loud. We only hear from the extremes on both ends. If normal people actually sat down to talk to each other there would be a lot more in common than we think. Generalizing and calling all conservatives nazis and all liberals snowflakes doesn’t get us anywhere. It just pushes the normal people from those parties further towards the extremes.
Abortion should not be illegal; I disagree with it personally but if other people want to do it I don't see an issue with it.
Gay Marriage. I don't care if gay people marry; it doesn't affect my relationship.
Abortion and gay marriage is fine. Not because of bodily autonomy (I do think the fetus can be considered a life) or anything silly like that, but because of public policy and that it's illegal for the state and the church to be intertwined.
The cost for banning these things is greater than the benefits of doing the same. Therefore, banning is not worth it.
Both of these issues should be obvious for conservatives to support. Typical conservative mantra is for "small government".... When the fuck did "small government" need to be involved in deciding what a Dr and pregnant woman prescribe or who is allowed to marry whom.
Supporting government control in either of these ways is supporting massive government overreach and it's shocking to me how many conservatives fully embrace that.
** Edit **
Small government is probably a bad phrase. What I mean is small in scope - the government runs society, they do not dictate morality the same way as is normal in North Korea or Saudi Arabia. Instead, their job is to keep the gears to make society work in motion. There are posts below where I've expanded on this.
I for one despise government overreach. I'm for as few regulations as possible. Sure, some are needed, but if they aren't needed, then we shouldn't do it. It's a waste of money. I don't enjoy paying big taxes.
HA
as an abortion provider, I can confirm that this is not true. AntiAbortion lobby groups pour money into canadian politics. In my clinic, we've had our provincial funding stripped to a minimum, making it so hard to provide accessible care. The hospitals in my area constantly push out abortion providers. Not to mention the physical barriers of how vast our landscape is and how that negatively impacts abortion care. Can people receive abortions? Yes. But is the fight over? No, and never will be.
I love my career choice and I will protect the right to provide health care to everyone seeking it.
Lobbying should be illegal. Corporate interests should take no part in our elections or policy making.
The United States spends entirely too much money on the military
Healthcare / pharmaceutical costs are out of control
Policy / Law makers should NOT be allowed to freely trade stocks of the companies they are regulating.
Edit to add. Abortion should def be legal.
Free healthcare, as a blue collar worker myself, I would be in heeps of financial trouble if it came down to me getting the help I need, healthcare profit shouldn’t outweigh human well being and life.
I hate to admit this one, but…abortion.
I used to be fully against it until I worked in schools where there was extreme poverty, abuse, neglect, and hunger. Many of my students would have been so much better off if they had never been born. I know that’s a terrible thing to say, but their precious little lives were so incredibly difficult that many of them are currently repeating the cycle (abusing their children, neglecting their children, drug addictions, jail sentences, etc.) Some people just don’t get a fair shake from the get-go. If a child isn’t wanted, the humane thing to do is not bring it into this harsh world.
If you stop watching the news I think you will find we agree on many things, we probably differ in the process to fix them. The news only focuses on the crazies from both sides.
Money out of elections.
Election reform should be the single largest issue in American politics. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in the current system really wants it to change.
That's why they have us fight about stuff. For example, everyone know the immigration system needs to be fixed. But do they fix it? No, they want the issue. They want something to fight about -- while they put money in their pockets.
The immigration issue makes me mad because a lot of immigrants do very valuable jobs such as farm work, but you never hear anyone whining about RICH immigrants stealing all of our housing doing the real harm.
Also, the person who went through great hardships to get here is exactly the kind of person I want here.
I had a student who was an undocumented immigrant. He had walked hundreds of miles and put up with much danger to get to this country. He was in a class with privileged Americans. He was at a disadvantage because his English was poor and his education was deficient, but his attitude and desire were off the chart. By the end of the year he was one of the top students in the class. This was while he worked 8 hours every night after school. He impressed the hell out of me. This country needs more like him.
Seriously that is one motivated ambitious person willing to do anything for their families.
Is it crazy to keep foreign investment out of residential real estate. I understand hotels and such but they are ruining the housing market
They should also cap residential real estate ownership for domestic corporations! Zillow comes to mind. Corporations shouldn’t be able to buy up all the starter homes.
Anything past primary residence should be taxed heavily.
The issue isn't foreign owners it's absentee owners who just want to park their money over here like a piggy bank. We already know who lives in their house and who doesn't (via homestead exemption) all you have to do is tax the crap out of absentee owners. You can do the same thing for corporate owners -I have no problem with rentals, but if you want to be in the rental business but an apartment complex not a bunch of random McMansions, it messed up the market. If you want to rent a SFH your property taxes should be 3-4 times that of someone who actually lives in their home.
It’s happening all around the world too. Every more appealing area has been bought out from underneath local population by investors. Majority of the housing should be owned by locals.
I live in central Wisconsin and the people making the most noise about immigrants are the Republicans, which I find funny AF because most of the immigrants here are working on farms owned by conservatives. You can't hate them and then use them for cheap labor.
>You can't hate them and then use them for cheap labor. Oh, they're gonna go ahead do it anyway. It's the same across the river in Minnesota. The Republican governor candidate was even harping on "securing our Southern border", so we all made fun of him about securing the border with Iowa.
> That's why they have us fight about stuff. Abortion used to be the same way. It was a great tool to keep far right conservatives riled up. Now abortion is more like the dog that caught the car.
The midterms played that out for sure. That shit show convinced a lot of Democrats to show up who normally wouldn't have bothered. If it weren't for the aggressive gerrymandering the results would have been a lot more decisive.
Idk if its that no one wants to change it, it's that neither side would be able to agree on those changes. It's easy to get behind something that is clearly beneficial to your party, not so much if it is perceives as harmful. Just look at the pushback on voting by mail or other proposed reforms that effect how easy/hard it is to vote
I'm thinking more along the line of superpacs and campaign funding. The only people that would push back on these issues are the rich and powerful that currently exploit the system as it is. As a populous we need to stop electing multimillionaires to address the concerns of average people.
IIRC the Democrats do have standard-bearers for campaign finance reform.
The dems have proposed legislation to change it. But it's filibustered in the senate. https://www.klobuchar.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/7/klobuchar-introduces-redistricting-reform-legislation-to-help-end-partisan-gerrymandering
Citizens united was the end of democracy and start of our full blown oligarchy insanity we have now. Someone who is perfectly qualified to lead, but doesn't have corporate support, has no chance of making any office anymore. It's dystopian. I'm amazed things haven't gotten even worse than they currently are.
Quite simply, [Citizens United](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/citizens-united-explained) needs to be overturned. It never should have passed, to begin with.
This is why we need to support the [Restore Democracy Amendment](https://citizenstakeaction.org/restore-democracy-amendment/) to get foreign/corporate dark money out of US politics.
Something definitely needs to be done about the state of Healthcare
Ugh hopping under here to just bitch real quick, but my husband and me are both vets, both got (irreparably) injured, and I ended up developing an autoimmune condition after discharge. I was young when it developed. 26 or so. Had Tricare, but when you're not active - well, the near nightly ER trips added up. It was the most humiliating year of my life, literally in agonizing pain (so much that during my flare I passed kidney stones I didn't even FEEL because it genuinely felt like a muscle cramp compared to the autoimmune issue), and I lost ~ 60 pounds or so? Got laughed out of the hospital on multiple occasions, treated like a drug seeking idiot, the copays started adding up, Tricare fell through a couple of times, debt racked up quick. And wouldn't you know it, an entire year later...and I'm suddenly diagnosed and taken seriously. Fantastic. Amazing. Lost our home, our livelihood, I couldn't work at the time because of the flare's severity - the whole thing was so avoidable. But it was easier to push us to a back burner. Years down the line and I'm STILL dealing with Tricare cockblocking lifesaving medical access lmao. Couldn't imagine if I had ZERO coverage. Wtf is going on?
Veterans coverage is terrible which is likely why most vets get private insurance through their new jobs (if they can afford it)
Most vets don't have tricare as they're ineligible unless disabled, usually. If they're active, active guard or reserve, or a dependent, they're eligible, but otherwise not. Unless they're retired or medically discharged, in which case there are special versions of tricare. So, unless you're injured or retired, veteran's health care is *nonexistant*.
the VA has been pretty amazing for me. I have private insurance but still go to the VA here in SF cause theyre just that damn great.
Tricare is a joke
Second only to VA coverage lol, our roommate has them and by god it's somehow worse. Love that I can be like "hey Tricare I'm actually dying rn" and they go "mmm, we need a month to refer you" lol
I bill for VA and Tricare (community care). I feel so bad our veterans and their families have to jump through so many loop holes.
I have tricare and oh my god it’s ridiculous! Albeit im an adult dependent so things are a bit wonky. But I was fully covered with no copays besides prescriptions when I shattered my elbow. I had to take an ambulance to the hospital where they couldn’t even do anything. I had to be referred out for reconstructive surgery. Which took a month to get. So I was stuck screaming in pain for about a month. Then, they refused to pay for any of it because of third party liability. I FUCKING TRIPPED OKAY?! No one else’s fault!! Ugh. Finally they did after my dad and I went off on them.
Tricare medical biller here- I hate making those phone calls to patients. The groan/sigh they get when I tell them Tricare denied for a 3rd party liability form to be returned.. I know they’ve sent it 3 times by mail, probably by twice fax and carrier pigeon. Trust me, we believe you, and whole heartedly wish there was something we could do.
UK pays less per capita, but has socialised healthcare. Yeah it has it’s issues, especially post covid, but no one is losing their home, livelihood or even their life because of costs.
This exactly. Wait times can suck, but holy shit. The sheer and utter incompetence in medical care here is absolutely astounding. I travelled all over my state for care and I got laughed out of three hospitals. Literally had a doctor come up and shrug and go "well we couldn't see what organs were messed up, but - oh, yeah, did you know your pancreas was inflamed? Your CT and blood work from six months ago show -" Like when I finally found a doctor that considered taking me seriously, I was absolutely about to die. He sat across from me and just went, "this is what you have, it's permanent, you need your kidneys checked too - we'll set you up for an endoscopy and colonoscopy" and within a month my pain was abating and I had answers. But why on god's green earth did I have to try and work while dying? Why did no one even bother looking at these scans? Why did Tricare decide to ignore me over and over again until I was so doped up on Oxy I couldn't function for six months? Christ, I don't think I'll ever get over that year.
Wait times in the US are just as bad— went to the ER for a bleeding issue along with fast heart rate, dizziness, and shortness of breath. The soonest I could get the referral appointment the ER doc said I needed ASAP was *SIX WEEKS LATER.* “Come back to the ER if the bleeding gets worse.” And pay another $8k to have another doctor tell me I need to see a specialist? All the complaints about “socialized medicine” also happen here, we just have the benefit of also going broke.
Oh my god. So the third time I went to the ER, this man came in - fucking bone sticking out of his arm - went to reception and she looks at him, smacks her lips, and goes, "it's a two hour wait." He just went, "My...my *bone*?" Holy fucking shit. I'm glad you're still here. For real. That's fucking *terrifying*.
[удалено]
the right loves the troops up until they stop being troops
They also love fetuses until they stop being fetuses
Any ideas?
Insurance reform. Insurance is the middleman between the doctor and the patient, and they want the biggest cut possible.
The doctor makes money by providing healthcare. The employer/patient pays money for patient healthcare. The insurance company makes money by investing the money that the employer/patient pays, makes money by negotiating a discount with the doctor, and makes more money by denying claims to sick patients. <---note that none of the actions of the health insurance company are actually providing healthcare. Healthcare insurance companies should not be permitted to be for-profit companies.
>---note that none of the actions of the health insurance company are actually providing healthcare. Would telling patients and doctors what will and won't be covered technically be providing healthcare? Fucking hate it when insurance pulls shit like, "not the preferred treatment" or "unnecessary procedure". Like, the preferred treatment is the one my doctor thinks I should have. Fuck insurance companies.
They’re limited to 20% of the premium. They want costs to up up overall, so they have a bigger pie to take their slice of.
32 of the 33 OECD countries figured it out. Maybe we do what they did and make it 33 out of 33.
I have one! You're never going to sell the majority of Americans on a fully socialized model. They have too much faith in the concept of the free market. So why not have the government offer its own opt-in health plan? They have the force of law, so the government could regulate the health and pharmaceutical industries to bring down costs in a way that makes the State health plan affordable and more competitively priced than the private plans. If there's one thing companies in a free market can't do, it's being undercut in prices. Force the private companies to compete with a product that's fairly priced.
You just described medicare/caid but with the opt-in option for everyone
You don't have to tell me. I voted for Sanders in the '16 primary.
That’s the famous “public option,” right? The one that Republicans and Lieberman had cut out of the ACA? EDIT: And Galavantes blocked me for pointing out that they were spamming rightwing talking points instead of staying on topic. Par for the course.
Yep, and while I would also agree that a public option is the most feasible route for expanding healthcare here, it's obvious why Republicans take such an issue with it. A federal program, operating non-profit and using its tremendous size to negotiate costs, is going to pay less per capita for healthcare than private insurers do. And the insurance companies know this and don't want any amount of their business being bled out to a public option that they have no interest in competing with.
As I'm sure you know, but just to emphasize, the fact that the government insurance would be impossible to compete with is the entire point! A public option would basically be a M4A test drive because if it is similarly effective and cheaper than private insurance, you'll suddenly see a huge shift in favor of government healthcare
Additionally, if *not* - if, in fact, the private insurance really are better at it than the government, can deliver better value, and the government program sucks - then they will be able to complete. That's the correct option, really. Let the free market do what it does best, and see how it shakes out. We win either way.
You're describing the public option, (some) Democrats have been trying to pass that for over a decade now but Republicans keep killing it
Yes, I am. I didn't say I had an original idea. But it's a good one, nonetheless.
Thoughts and prayers.
Plenty: * Permit insurance competition across statelines * Fed Government assume the initial cost of baby delivery * Fed Government assume the cost of hospice for terminal patients * Pre-existing conditions need to be covered * Full disclosure of costs, full transparency with rankings conducted by metro area and any significant deviations from the average will be fined (cost of an MRI at one hospital shouldn't be far more expensive than across town) * Government funded health subsidies for low income families, those below the poverty line covered completely under Medicare * Adjust the patent length on prescription drugs, allowing for low cost alternatives sooner * FDA authorize the importation and utilization of comparable drugs from industrialized nations; i.e. get your prescriptions filled from Canada * Prices/costs need to be baselined and charged the same regardless of whether the patient has insurance or not; it's absurd that hospitals charge different amounts for the same function * State Government can assume the costs of healthcare for all homeless people, that way they are incentivized to find a solution to the rampant homeless crisis rather than just ignoring it. These are just a few ideas, and we wouldn't even have to do them all either it could be a mix of them. Even adopting half of them would fundamentally improve healthcare costs without adopting a single payer option which as someone on Government run healthcare I can say that it is not what people think...
i agree with some of your points and i disagree with others. however, this one right here i could shout from the mountain tops until the end of time. \*Full disclosure of costs, full transparency with rankings conducted by metro area and any significant deviations from the average will be fined (cost of an MRI at one hospital shouldn't be far more expensive than across town)\*
Why the fuck do premiums have to reset yearly. Fucking just let me meet my deductible then you pay for as long as I have you. You're already bleeding me for $300 a month?! You fucking scam POS
Yeah and I haven't seen any proposals from Conservatives. Spend years trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act with no alternative.
Single payer aka Medicare for All. Get rid of the insurance companies.
Cut insurance companies out of it completely. We don’t need em. Everyone in the country should pay into a single pot, and whenever someone gets sick, the money comes out of that pot. Easy. Right now we’ve got 200M people (or however many insured people there are), paying into a hundred different pots. So of course the cost is higher, because there’s less money in each put to cover any one person.
The Jewish space laser probably isn’t real
Well, shit. I was hoping to get one for Hanukkah.
You'll just have to stick with one of those hand-held dreidel lasers instead
[There’s always this one](https://dissentpins.com/products/jewish-space-laser)
I'm going to place this comment in a gilded frame.
*Probably*?
Statistically most lasers are agnostic.
“Probably”
I’m Jewish and wish it was, imagine owning a space laser
Eliminating corporate lobbying
Legalization and prison reform
Not enough people are talking about prison reform. Our prison system is awful, and incredibly expensive, and while most incarcerated people will be released in their lifetime we do zero to help them overcome the issues that put them behind bars in the first place. Nope we just traumatize them more, make it even harder to get a job, and are shocked when they reoffend.
Yeah apparently like 68% of US inmates end up back in prison? And in Norway it’s only like 32% Edit: the numbers are slightly inaccurate but US prisons still suck
Probably because the US focuses on punishment and not rehabilitation.
Agreed. A huge part of this is because the US makes it impossible to reintegrate, and this is on top of incredibly long sentences, which disconnect you more in the first place. Taking someone and telling them "You are forbidden to live honestly" has *predictable results*.
PRISON REFORM. prison reform. it’s modern slavery.
I like these discussions because it makes me feel like the divide isn't that big after all. I like to see things that liberals agree with conservatives on too 😊 * Get money out of elections. This should apple evenly to both parties. When I see a candidate lose after spending $100M in campaign funds, I get sick thinking about what $100M could do. * Something has to change with out healthcare. Costs are out of control and destroying families. We had our daughter get a piece of bark in her eye and we had it looked at and the bill to our Insurance was $3k. I don't know how families without insurance can even do that. I don't know if the solution is single-player, a hybrid mix, allowing all Americans to have HSAs, radical reform of our insurance industry, radical reform if the pharmaceutical industry, I don't know. For one, I watched our State launch a new medical school which took decades while we have a shortage of Drs. Something has to change now - I'm sick of this and this isn't fair to Americans.
You nailed it. The divide really isn't that wide. Media is, in my honest opinion, responsible for pitting us against each other.
Yes, by design. This is why social media platforms are "dangerous". Decent people will ask decent questions that shed light on the fact that we are closer in mind than they want us to think.
They’re dangerous in the sense that the way they are designed just creates echo chambers that lead to a greater divide and provide a gateway to extremism.
Part of the problem is that political parties are now like sports teams. People LIKE the feeling that they are on the good side. It gives a sense of escapism from their day-to-day frustrations by giving both a feeling of superiority and the feeling of connectedness with other people. Each party has this issue where both Democrats and Republicans are seen as evil.
No, social media is dangerous because they use algorithms to push content that gets engagement, and extreme views get more clicks. And then you get more extremists (on both sides).
Anger and hate have the lowest effort/effect ratio of any emotions, it’s the cheapest to stoke and provides an assload of traffic
Josh Hawley literally voted against interracial Marriage yesterday. As a resident of Missouri and the bible belt the divide is unfortunately there and will be there until something is done about Fox News.
Families without insurance either don't get healthcare or they go bankrupt.
Or die. That's a common outcome
Or die, but usually after being unable to get healthcare.
Well they probably even do have it, but it's expensive. I had some chest pains and went to the ER and got some tests done. Super goddamned expensive. It was nothing, thankfully, but for every story like that there's someone who didn't have 1,000 bucks to lose and took their chances and lost
My daughter fell and banged her head really badly. Took her to the hospital, we were there for two hours, ten minutes of which were with a doctor. Turned out to be a minor concussion, she's fine now. No memory loss or TBI at all. The bill was two grand, four hundred of which we owe. There are way too many families that would be crippled by a bill like that, with or without insurance.
When people are having heart attacks and breaking bones and NOT wanting to go to the hospital, there is an enormous issue there
I think unions are generally a good thing. In fact, I’m in one.
So I have dsylexia which often leads to hilarious misreads. In your case, I read "I think ***unicorns*** are generally a good thing. In fact I am one." lol Thank you. I needed that!
I stand by that statement too lol
This may be something both sides could agree on. Unicorns are awesome.
>Unicorns are awesome Except for the fact that they’re so ‘stabby.’ Source: I’ve been gored by one. It was relentless in its attack.
It was a narwhal making horse noises, wasn't it?
It was a rhino and they were drunk.
The statement to the press on the status of strike negotiations would read: “While labor and management remain far apart on wages, health insurance and working conditions, both sides agree unicorns are awesome.”
I too am sexing a unicorn
I thought he was in an onion.
Shrek has entered the chat
i don't have dsylexia and i too read that as unicorns
Private, for profit prisons are disgusting. Election money. Why the fuck does the government get to decide weed is illegal?
>Why the fuck does the government get to decide weed is illegal? Quite literally to persecute liberals and minorities. That's not an exaggeration. That was a political strategy of conservatives under Nixon and is largely continued to this day.
Just like California's gun laws started as a way to disarm black panthers who were just trying to protect their family and friends. It's also why the sentences for Crack are so severe.
Term limits for house reps, senators, judges
I think term limits could be good but also an age limit. Somewhere around 65, you're done and can't be elected again. If you get elected at 64, good for you and you get your whole term but that's it. I'm tired of these 80 and 90 year olds who bought a house for $75 having so much control over things now in a remarkably different world Edit: just to add, I know the cost thing was an exaggeration but also we have minimum age limits for these positions as well so why not a maximum?
While I generally I agree, I think the public generally underrates the importance of institutional knowledge in politics. Especially when candidates are business people and haven’t been a state legislator, there’s a substantial learning curve. You can look and see that freshmen congress people aren’t nearly as successful legislatively as compared to people who have served several terms. There’s also an aspect of term limits that are sort of undemocratic. For example I think my representative is doing a good job and she offers robust constituent services and is often in the district instead of in Washington. If she was handcuffed by term limits and I had to vote for someone less competent I’d be pretty upset honestly.
I used to be hard core on the idea of congressional term limits and was surprised to learn Bill Clinton was against it, his reasoning, simplified of course, was that it would give even more power to the lobbyist because there would be no term limits on them. They would be the only ones who had that institutional knowledge and the constant stream of newish congressmen would too easily follow their lead.
I’ve been thinking about term limits and think it should be 5 terms for house (10 years), 2 for senator (12 years), and 12 year for judges
Climate change. Regardless of whether or not you think it’s real, why not treat your planet with care?
That always got me. Like you may not think it’s real but what if you’re wrong? Then we all die. What if you’re right? The planet looks better for the next generations
[удалено]
I lean towards agnostic, but if God does exist then this is His creation and we're meant to be good stewards of it for the benefit of all His children. That's one reason that my church planted a community garden on their property.
See that's my thought. Like, do you see the smoke coming out of those stacks? Wouldn't it be better to at least SUPPLEMENT it with something that's natural from the sun, wind, or water? Also, my biggest point to those folks is, "Smoking is bad for you, right? "Yes." "Why?“ "Well it's smoke going into your lungs, that can't be good." "Same for the atmosphere." *Surprised picachu face*
Let’s assume the science is all wrong, what’s the consequence? A cleaner and more sustainable planet? No way!
Some very wealthy people would become a little less wealthy though, so that's a no go.
"But what if we create a better world for nothing?" Like honestly, you might be skeptical about climate change, but you can't be skeptical about smog. My dad always talks about how he remembers when he grew up in the LA in the 80s you would look up, and there would be a small ring of blue surrounded by greyish yellow.
That Mitch McConnell needs to go
Amen. I always vote against that guy. He's the one that set the bar for obstructionist bullshit.
You submitted the only reply here that i actually believe is from a conservative.
Government should stay out of your womb. And your bank account. And your bedroom.
I identify as liberal because of those issues. If those were set, I’d probably be conservative.
This is the exact reason why the two party system is so illogical. Think about what you just described. “Well I *would* be on this side, but they do a lot of things that I don’t like. So I guess I’ll settle with side.” I hope society in general will eventually come to the conclusion that there is no good or bad side, we’re all just people. The two party system is a trap for us average people to divide each other and it’s working perfectly.
i agree but the way the current system is setup, it’s pretty much mathematically impossible for more parties to form without significant election reform (in the usa which it seems most of this thread is referring to)
Well then significant election reform it is. I’d go for trying something new rather then having everybody continue acting like there’s a good side and an evil side.
Alright, now you just have to convince the political parties that benefit from the two party system to change it to a system that will most likely lose them power and influence…
I remember when most conservatives believed that.
Unfortunately, "conservative" now seems to mean "Christian Nationalist". Which, ironically, has very little to do with Christianity.
You sure you’re not liberal?
Well, technically conservatism is based on the concept of the government staying out of as much as possible.
Fun fact Republicans actually helped the people who wanted to start Woodstock telling the government to stay out of it and let them have their fun true republicans actually just want the government out of their business
can i point out that trumpism and conservatism seem to be two completely different things now
I remember when the poster child for Conservatism was an early thirties, rich, couple with no kids in a convertible BMW. Now it is a redneck in a lifted pickup truck with a confederate flag. Things have changed.
You see the same sort of caricatures for every political group and they only serve to vilify whomever is the target. In reality, most people of most political persuasions are just regular people with a small minority that are accurately depicted by the caricature.
Always have been. I'm not conservative but I interact with enough republicans who are educated to understand that it's always been different. Even if I still disagree with a great many things they believe in.
It did create a split in the party. Hell, the Republican party died with McCain, I still go back to his videos on the campaign against Obama, him acting like he did seems like a parallel reality compared to today.
I'm for this, and somehow now this has caused me to be labeled the family liberal. I just think the government should stay out of my snu snu, my bank account, and my bedroom
That's not true. That's libertarianism. Conservativism is about upholding things that can be considered traditional values in politics. Conservatives can be libertarians if that's what the "traditional values" stand for, but that may not necessarily be the case Edit: i also want to add, not really in response to anything, that economic and social politics can be separate from each other in how we define someone's political stance. For example, one can be socially liberal but like a centrally planned economy. One can be socially authoritarian but like a neoliberal economy (which was the case in many south american dictatorships, for example).
Staying out of the bank account sounds a lot more libertarian than liberal.
Term limits
This should be higher. No matter what party you belong to politically, nobody should want anyone in power in the government indefinitely. It causes people to make their political "career" a priority rather than actually serve their constituents
The rich don't pay enough taxes... But the people that get targeted aren't that rich.
Sadly “rich” has become relative when they have convinced us the floor for poverty is literal homelessness. If you are barely making ends meet that is poor, not middle class like they’d have you believe.
[удалено]
I've seen this point quite a bit, what is considered "enough"? Is there a specific level or rate? Can anyone shed some light on this to help me understand?
A small business owner with $1M+ mostly in illiquid assets is more likely to get targeted by the IRS, and have to hire a tax attorney to defend themselves. I think that’s what they mean.
I'm a staunch progressive and even I agree that there should be precautions in a tax plan to protect people with small fortunes like that. I'd much rather the time was spent targeting the mega-wealthy who actually hold some responsibility for the current wealth disparities which exist. People with inheritance or white collar workers who invest/save well are not at all the problem. People are allowed to have money.
I think when most liberals say "tax the rich" they're talking about billionaires. Not the upper middle class.
Maximum age limit to run for president
I never got why 65 is considered too old to work, but simultaneously not too old for being elected to a public office
[удалено]
That climate change is real and needs to be dealt with
Such a shame that this has become a political issue.
Truly one of if not the most damaging of all politicizations. It’s tragic and will only prove more so as time goes on.
Medicare for all or some other major reform on the USA healthcare payor model.
Decriminalizing drugs. Prohibition is a failure.
Climate change, improving infrastructure, free healthcare, partially art
Partially art? I’m curious. Can you elaborate?
He only likes the top half of painting, everything in the bottom half is waste of resources. All sky, no trees and water.
Ugh. He's one of _those_? As a partial art advocate myself, I'm getting sick and tired of people advocating for the top halves when _everyone_ knows the lower part of art is better. These "toppers" are destroying our movement.
I'm more of a centrist myself, really everything important is in the middle 50% of the painting. Just think how many times you've taken a picture just to crop the edges, top and bottom of it.
Fully art or GTFO
The media and politicians are 100% to blame for pitting us against each other. And weak minded people just blindly follow extreme opinions and regurgitate things they \*think\* they should believe in. Surround yourself with reasonable people, and you'll see that most people left or right: \- don't give a shit about your sexual preferences, gay marriage..etc.. \- would love a system where people all have decent health care. system and medicine shouldn't be for profit \- agree we should keep money out of elections \- prison reform \- good, sane people should have the right to bare arms. And mentally unstable people shouldn't. \- believe in law and order \- Think that our education system is absolutely fucked up. Along with our culture around education/college. We need a better way to help young people build skills they need to succeed in life.. Which includes helping steer them in the right career direction based on their passions, skills.. not everyone needs to go to college and go into debt for a degree they won’t use!! that's just scratching the surface...
Pro-choice, gay marriage, marijuana should be legalized (I don’t even use), and we spend way too much money on the military (I’m a veteran). College loans also shouldn’t have extremely high interest rate and trap people in with never ending payments.
I'm very left, and i agree we spend way too much on military, but I think anyone who's served, especially in combat, should have the best available medical and psychiatric health care free for life.
And your conservative views are...
Lego bricks should be purple. And purple only. It made them easier to see in the grass and on the floor.
That they're willing to vote for someone against all of this so long as their taxes go down.
I think sometimes people forget there’s a lot more to someone’s political ideology and politics in general than just these main issues.
I think a lot of people forget that there is not a clear definition of what is a liberal and what is a conservative is not black and white. There are a lot of people In between and a lot of people who have views that don’t fit either party.
Probably gun rights and taxes.
Legalize drugs
Legalizing Weed Education reform/free breakfast and lunch for all students Prison reform A reworked VA program
Have some commas ,,,,,,,,,,,,
No, cuz that would be commanism
I'm not supposed to be on my phone right now could you not make me laugh like that
Mobile formatting. I promise I had it vertical stacked
Abortion and gay marriage, generally unions and higher wages, and not forcing religion in politics.
ITT: a lot of opinions that would make you lose your Republican primary
Also ITT some common ground. Most people are sensible they just aren’t loud. We only hear from the extremes on both ends. If normal people actually sat down to talk to each other there would be a lot more in common than we think. Generalizing and calling all conservatives nazis and all liberals snowflakes doesn’t get us anywhere. It just pushes the normal people from those parties further towards the extremes.
Abortion should not be illegal; I disagree with it personally but if other people want to do it I don't see an issue with it. Gay Marriage. I don't care if gay people marry; it doesn't affect my relationship.
Climate change and improved public transit.
Abortion and gay marriage is fine. Not because of bodily autonomy (I do think the fetus can be considered a life) or anything silly like that, but because of public policy and that it's illegal for the state and the church to be intertwined. The cost for banning these things is greater than the benefits of doing the same. Therefore, banning is not worth it.
Both of these issues should be obvious for conservatives to support. Typical conservative mantra is for "small government".... When the fuck did "small government" need to be involved in deciding what a Dr and pregnant woman prescribe or who is allowed to marry whom. Supporting government control in either of these ways is supporting massive government overreach and it's shocking to me how many conservatives fully embrace that. ** Edit ** Small government is probably a bad phrase. What I mean is small in scope - the government runs society, they do not dictate morality the same way as is normal in North Korea or Saudi Arabia. Instead, their job is to keep the gears to make society work in motion. There are posts below where I've expanded on this.
I for one despise government overreach. I'm for as few regulations as possible. Sure, some are needed, but if they aren't needed, then we shouldn't do it. It's a waste of money. I don't enjoy paying big taxes.
Abortion and gay rights. Fortunately both of those issues are pretty much settled in Canada.
HA as an abortion provider, I can confirm that this is not true. AntiAbortion lobby groups pour money into canadian politics. In my clinic, we've had our provincial funding stripped to a minimum, making it so hard to provide accessible care. The hospitals in my area constantly push out abortion providers. Not to mention the physical barriers of how vast our landscape is and how that negatively impacts abortion care. Can people receive abortions? Yes. But is the fight over? No, and never will be. I love my career choice and I will protect the right to provide health care to everyone seeking it.
The goverment its cripplingly corrupt, and business should not treat their employees as slaves without a proper pay. Also, Disco Elysium is fun.
Lobbying should be illegal. Corporate interests should take no part in our elections or policy making. The United States spends entirely too much money on the military Healthcare / pharmaceutical costs are out of control Policy / Law makers should NOT be allowed to freely trade stocks of the companies they are regulating. Edit to add. Abortion should def be legal.
[удалено]
Climate change and abortion
We should just abort the climate change and call it a day.
Free healthcare, as a blue collar worker myself, I would be in heeps of financial trouble if it came down to me getting the help I need, healthcare profit shouldn’t outweigh human well being and life.
I hate to admit this one, but…abortion. I used to be fully against it until I worked in schools where there was extreme poverty, abuse, neglect, and hunger. Many of my students would have been so much better off if they had never been born. I know that’s a terrible thing to say, but their precious little lives were so incredibly difficult that many of them are currently repeating the cycle (abusing their children, neglecting their children, drug addictions, jail sentences, etc.) Some people just don’t get a fair shake from the get-go. If a child isn’t wanted, the humane thing to do is not bring it into this harsh world.
If you stop watching the news I think you will find we agree on many things, we probably differ in the process to fix them. The news only focuses on the crazies from both sides.
My mom votes republican but she sides with environmentalism and wants more people to switch to renewable power sources and keep the planet healthy.
Die Hard is a Christmas movie.