"Let’s upgrade the technology, let’s look at the fact that the folks who are working on border security on the ground know that they need upgraded infrastructure around things like drones, and they need cameras... So yes, I’m all for increased border security where we need it. I’m not for a wall."What if the experts came up with a plan for an "upgraded infrastructure" that included, in some places, something that is a wall, perhaps something clearly high-tech and that wasn't at all medieval? I'm picturing something that is genuinely well-engineered to work and doesn't seem to be about just expressing the idea of controlling the border. Is Harris saying in advance that she would not vote for that? Because that's what "under any circumstances" would mean.
I haven't been a believer in the wall, but I would look at a specific plan, designed by experts, and try to make an informed decision. Why is Harris flaunting her uninformed prejudgment? I know the answer. She's doing political expression (even as she — rightly! — implies all the "Build the wall" talk is political expression and not serious policy). Show me that you would do serious policy and that you are not a political hack. My standards are low: I want a competent, earnest President. Despite my low standards, I never get what I want.
Howard??
ADDED: Harris's idea of "upgraded infrastructure" is "around things like drones, and they need cameras." It sounds at though the idea is to look at illegal immigration, not to do anything about it. Is that really what "the folks" "on the ground" are saying, and can you explain to me how they "know" this is what they need? Do they also say this is all they need? And you can't know what is needed apart from having a goal, so is it even established that these "folks" Harris has heard from want to stop illegal immigration? What expertise do these "folks" have? I'm wary of folk remedies.
IN THE COMMENTS: Meade said:
"I'm wary of folk remedies."
The Folk Art of the Deal
Posts
251 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 251 of 251@Dickin'Bimbos@Home:
I read the medicare polls Drudge linked the other day. Everyone wants free _________ (fill in the blank) until they are asked to chip in. That is what the poll stated.
Sorry is that offends you.
I have no idea what polls you are referring to, but Medicare recipients have been polled for decades over their satisfaction with the program, and it has nothing to do with "everyone wants free _________ (fill in the blank) until they are asked to chip in." These are retirees who have paid into the Medicare system their entire working life and are currently within the system.
I am sorry that offends your ideologically rigid position.
@CWJ:
J. Farmer @ 4:03,
Thank you for proving mine in return.
You're welcome.
The world "universal" is one of the creepiest Hillary-esque words used by progressives.
We can ill afford to provide health care to the entire universe.;-)
But I don't think Medicare for all [and ditching Medicaid altogether] is an entirely bad idea. We certainly need a new system. The one we have today is a mess.
I agree with Bimbos that the federal government is usually the worst solution to just about any problem and I would rather see the states administer the system. But, truly, something needs to be done and I'd rather see it done bilaterally than by the Progs. Right now, only the very poor and the very rich [and maybe government employees] get affordable health care coverage.
No free health care for illegals!!! Women cross the border here when in early labor and have their babies. Their bills never get paid. Our county hospital ER serves as a primary medical service to Mexicans near the border. I'm sure this happens in other border cities, too. We apparently can't afford to care for our own much less all of Central America.
How about a super wide canal from the Gulf to the Pacific Coast. Fill it with sharks with frickin laser beams or at least ill tempered sea bass?
When a society runs out of money, it will be necessary to conserve resources by not spending on healthcare for older people.
My standards are low: I want a competent, earnest President. Despite my low standards, I never get what I want.
Howard??
I would've thought Dwight Howard was too young, given he's still playing in the NBA, but actually he turns 35 a month before Inauguration Day 2021.
Bryce Howard will be 35 in October 2027. I’d take him over Kamala.
Mock Turtle -
The list of Universal necessities grows every day! (because it's for the children.)
Universal health care
Universal pre-K
Universal child care
universal college
I suspect soon it will be Universal:
grocerys
Universal Housing
Universal free basic income
more more more this that and everything.
Before too long, the government will control every thought and every decision.
The tax hikes are going to be to the universe and back.
Harris campaign slogan: "Read my lips; no new wall."
The monthly premium for Medicare ranges from $135.50 to $ 460.50, depending upon your income. Then there’s the cost of a prescription drug plan that ranges from about $20 to $85.00. A supplemental health insurance plan to cover what Medicare doesn’t that has an average premium of $350 per month. Last but not least, there’s the 3% of you salary sent to Medicare for 40 years or so. Hey, $1,000+ per month and it does’t even include taxpayers kicks in and still doctors are only reimbursed at a rate of 60 to 80 %.
@Dickin'Bimbos@Home:
How do you feel about universal suffrage?
J. Farmer,
I do have a serious question regarding your comment immediately after mine in the "left wing college town thread" thread earlier today. I took it to express an expansion on my comment rather than a criticism that I had failed to include democracies. Was that correct?
That one is OK - J Farmer, but hardly a modern topic. and I still detest the word "Universal" as applied by and to most modern democratic progressive "free" stuff lists.
If anything, the democratics are moving in the direction of forcing everyone to vote, even if they don't want to. Get everyone to automatically register and automatically vote democrat, and bam - you never lose.
cool.
@CWJ:
I took it to express an expansion on my comment rather than a criticism that I had failed to include democracies. Was that correct?
Yes. I am a firm believe in Michel's "iron law of oligarchy," which he first described in his 1911 book Political Parties.
@Dickin'Bimbos@Home:
He. I am not necessarily opposed to mandatory voting. So long as a "none of the above" option is permitted ;)
Mandatory anything is ... not American
except maybe vaccines and potty training.
Unknown said..
J. Farmer says and he is correct..
"The walls-don't-work argument is obviously bullshit. The wall is being opposed with such ferocity precisely because people are terrified that it will work."
Worth a hearty bold. Be nice if that would fit on a bumper sticker.
As I understand it, once a non-US person crosses into the US the border patrol takes their name, listens to the sad asylum claim, and transports them to a shelter where they can sign up for welfare and wait 4 years for a hearing they will never show up for. Electronic detection will just let the patrol get there faster to sign them up for welfare. An answer is to physically prevent them from becoming foot dry in the US and requiring them to go to an authorized entry port (the wall). That is why these detection system programs are useless, and why Democrats like them.
As an alternate we could require e verify and heavily fine and eventually after much repetition imprison anyone who hires an illegal, even people who want their grass cut. This would work over a longer time period to reduce economic migration which is why business management is against this.
"Let me be clear" is a variant of "I want you to listen to me," said in proper school marm parlance: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luLpdr4n8m4
And Billy Bob Boy came down to address the Grownups from writing his homework. Doesn't he look swell with Al and Hill?
So Kama Sutra REALLY means, "I'm going to fuck you good."
Why can't we get some decent folks? Please?
doctors are only reimbursed at a rate of 60 to 80 %
Doctors are reimbursed about 20% of billed charges. You might ask, "why not just lower your charges to the amount paid?"
Then your "profile" would be adjusted to the lower amount and you would get 20% of that amount.
If you are a Medicare beneficiary, look at your EOB. In some case the reimbursement is 10% of billed charges.
If a physician who is a Medicare provider offers a cash price, he/she is committing a crime and will be prosecuted if caught at it.
Israel, which is very serious about border security, built a wall enhanced with technology. The number of terrorist attacks fell sharply. The Israelis invented drones; they have very sophisticated technology. But, apparently, they believed a physical barrier was an essential part of securing their border.
Pardon me Framer & 'Bimbo, but walls will NOT stop 100% of all illegal immigration, drugs, fill in the blank, BUT whenever it has been applied it works. The Mayor of El Paso was on the radio this a.m., came off kind of lukewarm about a wall from sea to shining gulf, but did provide that El Paso had terrible crime problems slopping over the border and a wall FIXED IT.
@Farmer, very sorry to be so late getting back to you. I just got back in from snow shoveling.
My point, which you obtusely overlook, is that I am not JUST under Medicare. Without medigap coverage I would be royally screwed. As it is, I had to pay for lazer incisions in my cataract surgery out of pocket because Medicare classified lazer use in cataract surgery as “experimental” (despite its having been around since 1997).
And my first assertion was that countries with single payer (which I am thankfully not under since I have medigap) generally discriminate against older recipients. Pointing out that I have Medicare is a non sequitur.
@Big Mike:
My point, which you obtusely overlook, is that I am not JUST under Medicare
This is the first time you mentioned Medicare supplemental insurance, so I could not have overlooked the point, obtusely or otherwise. Also, what you're complaining about in Medicare happens every single day in the private health insurance market. Health insurance plans refuse to cover any number of procedures for any number of reasons in order to protect their bottom line. Rationining is inevitable when you have virtually unlimited demand and finite resources. The question is how do you want to ration.
Again, if Medicare is such a disaster for people, and given that people on Medicare are the largest voting bloc, someone campaigning on ending Medicare should be very popular. Yet no such candidate has materialized in the last half century. Among every single thing the Federal government does, Medicare is the most popular by a mile.
"Every Republican wants to do a big number on Social Security. They wanna do it on Medicare, they wanna do it on Medicaid, and we can't do that, and it's not fair to the people."
-Donald J. Trump
Donald Trump is an effective, earnest and honest be president. Harris has shown herself to be a deceitful Democrat party liar completely unethical. Scumbag.
gilbar said...
"obviously, a wall wouldn't be practical for the whole length of the border; Rio Grande for instance
However, the Rio Grande Would BE optimal for SHARKS WITH LASERS ON THEIR HEADS!!
or even Mutated Sea Bass
<a href="https://youtu.be/iK836PUx1-0>Silver carp.</a>
Blogger is so picky.
Silver carp.
Kamala wants cameras to be able to count potential votes so Dems can best allocate campaign resources.
You probably should have told the previous Congress and Trump how strongly you felt about the wall since now it's too late.
Another Democrat saying they don't support border security, and soon another editorial that Trump is lying when he says Democrats don't support border security.
I'm sure ms. Harris will soon expand on her remarks and indicate that "more personnel" are also needed.
That is: UNION personnel who can be trusted to vote (D). That's the only remaining reason for TSA's Panda Security.
This is the first time you mentioned Medicare supplemental insurance ...
@Farmer, I mentioned that fact in the first sentence of my comment at 4:02, which is interesting because you responded to the last sentence of that same comment at 4:08.
The question of whether Medicare is popular is orthogonal to my assertion that I am aware of no country with single payer that does not discriminate against the elderly in providing healthcare. As you keep trying to shift the discussion around to Medicare, I infer that you don't know of any such country either.
5 Billion = 5,000 millions
Walls are vertical ribbons, roads are horizontal.
Road costs vary continually, and are based on a variety of factors. However, in 2009, it costs approximately $3 million to twin 1 kilometre of highway. Building new highway costs approximately $3.5 million for a new 2-lane 100-Series highway plus bridges, and approximately $6 million for a new 4-lane highway.
@Big Mike:
@Farmer, I mentioned that fact in the first sentence of my comment at 4:02, which is interesting because you responded to the last sentence of that same comment at 4:08.
You're right. My mistake on that, and I apologize.
The question of whether Medicare is popular is orthogonal to my assertion that I am aware of no country with single payer that does not discriminate against the elderly in providing healthcare.
Do you know if any healthcare system, period, that does not "discriminate against the elderly in providing healthcare?" It is endemic to the system. Even in a totally private health insurance market, health insurance companies would control costs by restrict care to the elderly. Otherwise, they'd go bankrupt.
The only thing not universal is the chipping in part.
Would you join a club where half the people pay no dues, everybody can take whatever they want, and 10% are forced to pay 90% of the dues at gunpoint? How could such a club survive?
Answer: debt and universal suffrage which eventually turns in universal suffering.
WHo cares who the Democrat nominee is, just another face wanting to take charge of the kleptocracy.
Even in a totally private health insurance market, health insurance companies would control costs by restrict care to the elderly. Otherwise, they'd go bankrupt.
Not true.
. Farmer said...
@walter:
Of course, Farmer. Depends on the plan too.
But the mentality behind the MFA crowd seems to think they can put the system in a blender and get magic.
If they were honest, it would be called Medicaid for All..with attendant either avoidance by providers or their exit from the field ASAP.
How do you explain the widespread supermajority support for Medicare among its recipients?
--
as I explained earlier, it exists in its supported form due to low reimbursement rates offset by higher rates from other payments. Have you looked at CMS service statements from, say, your parents? The price asked is often reimbursed at a fraction deemed appropriate by CMS.
In my small world (video production)I have encountered doctors who have opted out of Medicare due to insufficient reimbursement.
When trying to help my parents navigate health issues, I have encountered hospitals that have to maintain a specific balance between Medicare and private plan reimbursements.
One Madison hospital (separate from my experience) said as much in the course of a local paper's investigation about rates...saying explicitly they would not exist without managing that.
With Medicaid reimbursements less than Medicare's the issues of coverage vs access are compounded.
@walter:
Not true.
Evidence? Private health insurance plans already do this. But it is your contention that they would not do it for the sickest, most expensive cohort (i.e. those over the age of 65)?
@walter:
Have you looked at CMS service statements from, say, your parents?
Neither of my parents is over 65 year old.
The price asked is often reimbursed at a fraction deemed appropriate by CMS.
Yes, this is also done by private health insurance plans. If you are uninsured, a hospital may charge you a $1,000 for a procedure while having a contract with say Blue Cross Blue Shield in which BCBS agrees to only pay $100 for the procedure.
And again, nothing in your response explains why Medicare is extremely popular among its recipients.
I am for much better enforcement (and more not less legal immigration), but stricter control. While I'm not sure a wall will do it (remember the times when migrants had the highest rate of return to Mexico was when there was the least border security - they could come and go), I question the notion that just because something is old or "medieval" it is no good!
"'Two duffel bags filled with 17 rifles, shotguns, handguns, and ammunition were found on a private Texas ranch and confiscated by border officials. The weapons were taken from a ranch near the Border Patrol´s Carrizo Springs Station in Del Rio, Texas. An unnamed citizen called the agency after seeing a group of suspected illegal immigrants carrying large bags on nearby land Friday.. - Washington Examiner'
"This story will never make it to the mainstream news."
What does this prove? Two duffel bags with weapons were found abandoned after an anonymous caller reported seeing illegal immigrants carrying large bags nearby. Is this true? Possibly. Is it proof the persons seen carrying large bags were illegal immigrants? No. Is it proof these bags were the bags reportedly seen being carried by the supposed illegal immigrants? No. Did a real person actually see a group of other real people carrying bags nearby? Who knows? The bags containing weapons could have been left there by a group of illegal immigrants wandering by, or by a group of other persons wandering nearby, or the whole thing could be a false flag: the bags and weapons could have been planted there and a call phoned in by the perpetrators to create the belief that illegals are bringing in weapons to our country.
"'I want a competent, earnest President. Despite my low standards, I never get what I want.'
"You don't think Trump is competent and earnest?"
Hahahahahaha!!!!
"Your remarks about the potential deficiencies of a wall are probably correct, but those deficiencies really reflect lack of unified political will, which is our problem in the U.S."
This is the nature of representative government, (to the negligible degree we remain one). If there is not sufficient agreement among policy makers--presumably representing their constituents--to enact or fund a particular policy, it will not happen.
The President is not a king or dictator, and he has no power over the budget...that power is reserved to Congress. If this or any president shuts down the government to try to compel Congress to enact or fund a particular policy that he wants to see, he is usurping the power of Congress. It doesn't matter if the policy is a good one or a bad one: if Congress will not agree to enact or fund it, if the president cannot convince them through deal-making to vote for his desired policy, the President can't do it. If we allow, even cheer this or any president in shutting down government to force Congress to his will, and if this works, we will set the precedent for all future presidents in all future policy/funding disagreements to shut down government to get what they want. Our passive acceptance or active encouragement of this practice will establish the basis for our having a permanent dictatorial presidency as the norm.
This morning in comments:
"Wouldn't it make sense to use the 5 billion that Trump wants for the wall to make eVerify available to all employers and mandate that all employers use it?!"
In addition to the "medieval" propaganda, I've heard the left characterize it as "temporary solution", when we need better high tech solutions.
How could a physical barrier be considered temporary? It will stand for years, even decades doing its one function-- making it impossible or difficult to get from one side to the other.
What's temporary are the "high tech" solutions, which can be reversed by the next liberal administration. The next liberal president can reverse all those drones, or sensors or even border agents.
But meanwhile, that physical barrier will just exist-- making it impossible or difficult to get from one side to the other.
Post a Comment