blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 08:14 am
From the Jane Mayer piece
Quote:
Benkler’s assessment is based on an analysis of millions of American news stories that he and two co-authors, Robert Faris and Hal Roberts, undertook for their 2018 book, “Network Propaganda: Manipulation, Disinformation and Radicalization in American Politics.” Benkler told me that he and his co-authors had expected to find “symmetric polarization” in the left-leaning and the right-leaning media outlets. Instead, they discovered that the two poles of America’s media ecosystem function very differently. “It’s not the right versus the left,” Benkler says. “It’s the right versus the rest.”
LInk
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 08:23 am
@blatham,
Well, one of my electricity generating hamsters was found mummified behind the sofa, the other didn't survive in the vacuum cleaner bag.
I thought that was the reason. But yours is more lucent.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 08:31 am
@Walter Hinteler,
If I was a knight, Sir Lucent the Brave and Glowing would be a fine name.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 08:43 am
Another bit from Mayer
Quote:
According to Media Matters, in the first year after Mueller was appointed Hannity alone aired four hundred and eighty-six segments attacking the federal criminal investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election; thirty-eight per cent of those segments claimed that law-enforcement officials had broken the law. In recent weeks, Hannity has spoken of “a coup,” and a guest on Laura Ingraham’s program, the lawyer Joseph diGenova, declared, “It’s going to be total war. And, as I say to my friends, I do two things—I vote and I buy guns.”
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 09:42 am
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/432047-pelosi-on-single-payer-health-care-how-do-you-pay-for-that?fbclid=IwAR2Ht8xlPxCDIF_OaHKzIoEMQnQJxZyXsfxKL56Cpjk-hNZKumtSL7Tbfu4
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) expresses some skepticism about single-payer health insurance in a new interview, asking how the trillions of dollars in new spending would be paid for.

“That is, administratively, the simplest thing to do, but to convert to it? Thirty trillion dollars. Now, how do you pay for that?” Pelosi said of single-payer in an interview with Rolling Stone.

The roughly $30 trillion price tag over ten years of single-payer health insurance, sometimes referred to as "Medicare for all," has been one of the leading criticisms of the proposal.

Over 100 House Democrats this week introduced a single-payer bill. But Pelosi, while supporting hearings on the legislation, has not given her support to the bill itself.

She faces a balancing act given that many more-centrist House Democrats think single-payer goes too far, and instead want to focus on improving the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and perhaps adding the option for government-run insurance.

Pelosi did not dismiss the idea of single-payer out of hand in the Rolling Stone interview, which was conducted in January but published this week.

“So I said, ‘Look, just put them all on the table, and let’s have the discussion, and let people see what it is. But know what it is that you’re talking about,’” Pelosi said.

But she touted her signature achievement, the ACA, and said she did not want to dismantle it, which moving to a single-payer system would do.

“All I want is the goal of every American having access to health care,” Pelosi said. “You don’t get there by dismantling the Affordable Care Act.”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who is the main sponsor of the single-payer legislation with Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), struck a very different tune than Pelosi on the issue of paying for the legislation when speaking to reporters earlier this week.

Jayapal said there is much less scrutiny of how to pay for military spending or tax cuts, but “all of a sudden” when the measure is about providing health care for all, people ask how to pay for it. Jayapal’s bill does not spell out how it would be paid for.

Jayapal, though, has so far been publicly appreciative of Pelosi's stance on her bill, thanking her for supporting hearings on it.

Pelosi instead touted smaller improvements to the Affordable Care Act, such as restoring funding known as reinsurance, which helps bring down premiums, and getting more states to accept the expansion of Medicaid.

Pelosi noted that she supported a government-run “public option,” a smaller step than full-scale single-payer, that would be sold alongside private insurance on the ACA marketplaces. But she noted that the idea could not get through the Senate in 2009 and 2010 when ACA bill was passed.

House Democratic leaders have already started moving smaller bills through committee aimed at shoring up the ACA, through actions such as restoring funding for outreach to sign people up, funding which was slashed by President Trump.

As different Democrats jockey over where to go next, Pelosi told Rolling Stone, “This is a very interesting debate.”
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 09:51 am
@edgarblythe,
A random response from a reader of that article

Dale Cunningham
Naw, they're just using that as cover to believe what's more profitable for themselves. "Don't make me do what I say I want to" is their rallying cry.
edgarblythe
 
  5  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:02 am
I didn't write this but -

Most of the millionaires and billionaires in this country, and in the world for that matter, did not accrue their fortune through “hard work and determination.” This has got to be one of the biggest, steamiest piles of B.S ever fed to the gullible masses. In reality, most rich people are rich people because their parents were rich people. And their parents were rich people and their ... You get the idea.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:12 am
@edgarblythe,
I believe this to be true for billionaires.

I have seen some report though that most millionaires are self made (I’d imagine this is less and less true the closer people approach being a billionaire).

Many many people who are middle class can become millionaires through savings and home ownership. Saving 10% of your income should be enough to save a million dollars by your 60’s for most people.
blatham
 
  3  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:19 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
Naw, they're just using that as cover to believe what's more profitable for themselves.
If he's speaking of Pelosi here, he's not bright.
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:20 am
@maporsche,
There is a mix, but the bullshit is palpable.
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:21 am
@blatham,
But he got it spot on.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:21 am
@edgarblythe,
What bullshit is that?


Someone starting at age 25, making $50,000/year (say being a teacher) who saves 10% in their 401k and gets even a 7% return (S&P the last 30 years had a 12% return) will have 1 million dollars in their 401k by age 65. A 12% return would have them be a millionaire at age 53.

That’s not bullshit, that’s just basic math. If they get raises or company matching 401k dollars then they’ll be a millionaire much much sooner. Teachers would even have pensions. If you get married you can often make multiple millions as a family.

This isn’t possible for everyone for a great number of reasons, but it CERTAINLY is possible for many people.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:24 am
A Clinton-era centrist Democrat explains why it’s time to give democratic socialists a chance
“The baton rightly passes to our colleagues on our left.”
Quote:
The rise of the Democratic left, personified by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), has raised a serious question: Should Democrats lean away from market-friendly stances and get comfortable with big government again? Should they embrace an ambitious 2020 candidate like Sanders and policies like the Green New Deal, or stick with incrementalists like former Vice President Joe Biden and more market-oriented ideas like Obamacare?

One of the most interesting takes I’ve seen on this debate came from Brad DeLong, an economist at the University of California-Berkeley. DeLong, who served as deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for economic policy in the Clinton administration, who is one of the market-friendly, “neoliberal” Democrats who have dominated the party for the last 20 years. The term he uses for himself is “Rubin Democrat” — referring to followers of finance industry-friendly Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin.

Yet DeLong believes that the time of people like him running the Democratic Party has passed. “The baton rightly passes to our colleagues on our left,” DeLong wrote. “We are still here, but it is not our time to lead.”

It’s not often that someone in this policy debate — or, frankly, any policy debate — suggests that their side should lose. So I reached out to DeLong to dig into the reasons for his position: Why does he believe that neoliberals’ time in the sun has come to an end?
Read it all http://bit.ly/2HbtOa8
Economics isn't my thing but I've been following DeLong for years. Very thoughtful guy.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:29 am
A Truthdig headline. I didn't have the stomach for the article.

Giving the Bomb to Saudi Arabia’s Dr. Strangelove
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  5  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:40 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
But he got it spot on.
His explicit indictment is that she has been feathering her own nest rather than doing her job effectively. How could he know this? It is the sort of statement/claim that Trump would make.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 10:57 am
@blatham,
FAUX News has always been propaganda. The propagandists of yesteryear may have been less straightforward about it than today, and they may have supported somebody less assholistic than Trump (say, W) but they were and always have been hired to lie to their audience. I'm surprised that Mayer pretends to discover this only now...
edgarblythe
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 11:03 am
@blatham,
It may not be bribes so much as dinosaur loyalty to the status quo.
blatham
 
  0  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 11:03 am
@Olivier5,
Mayer is possibly the best political writer in the US presently. She's not naive about this. You are just unfamiliar with her work.
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 11:20 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
It may not be bribes so much as dinosaur loyalty to the status quo.
I'm sure there is an inevitable generational conflict in all of this. Read Brad DeLong's interview I just linked. But the guy's charge of criminality or ethical failure is the sort of bullshit rhetoric (he provides no evidence and doesn't even seem to think that necessary) that we ought to disregard rather than attend to.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 4 Mar, 2019 11:39 am
@blatham,
Quote:
Mayer is possibly the best political writer in the US presently.

She is an anti-Trump shill who knows the big money is in attacking Trump, his polices, his nominees and his popularity. Period.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 03:38:32