Well, he promised healthcare reform and that charges would go down - the complete opposite has happened to me, all those that I have spoken to about it and judging by what I've read elsewhere to others as well. We don't know any of his plans, he is full of **** and nobody can prove differentlyKateR wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:09 pmVegas, is it your contention that America since the day he took office has been running without a healthcare policy and people are just doing what they want because there is no policy? This is the same answer to every other Governmental department that requires a policy. I can see not being happy with any number of things he is responsible for and complaining attacking them, I totally accept we should be able see the alternative to anything that is removed/changed/modified from the Obama era.
The next American President?
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
Re: The next American President?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ ... nistrationKateR wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:09 pmVegas, is it your contention that America since the day he took office has been running without a healthcare policy and people are just doing what they want because there is no policy? This is the same answer to every other Governmental department that requires a policy. I can see not being happy with any number of things he is responsible for and complaining attacking them, I totally accept we should be able see the alternative to anything that is removed/changed/modified from the Obama era.
Trumps environment policy aim - to achieve energy independence for the US - is good. His means to achieving this - via fossil fuels - is bad. The lack of concern he has for the environment is terrible.
Promoting renewable energy as the road to energy independence would provide Trump with a way to boost US technology and innovation, in addition to domestic manufacturing. It could all be a completely made in America solution to energy dependence and a sluggish economy, as well as stepping up on the world stage to do their part against global warming. With such a huge internal market, they could easily end up as a major international supplier (maybe even operator) of renewable energy for other countries. Win win.
Rather than taking this path, he’s cut US environmental standards and is willing to allow resource extraction in national parks.
Re: The next American President?
Andrew,AndrewJB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:41 pmhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ ... nistration
Trumps environment policy aim - to achieve energy independence for the US - is good. His means to achieving this - via fossil fuels - is bad. The lack of concern he has for the environment is terrible.
Promoting renewable energy as the road to energy independence would provide Trump with a way to boost US technology and innovation, in addition to domestic manufacturing. It could all be a completely made in America solution to energy dependence and a sluggish economy, as well as stepping up on the world stage to do their part against global warming. With such a huge internal market, they could easily end up as a major international supplier (maybe even operator) of renewable energy for other countries. Win win.
Rather than taking this path, he’s cut US environmental standards and is willing to allow resource extraction in national parks.
Global Warming is a global issue as you well know, not an American problem, one big issue for decades has been how the UN and the Paris accord were set up and so many lay people are clueless on what is and what is going on. Maybe for all the wrong reasons in one sense but walking away from the Paris agreement in terms of not paying the money has made the real polluters sit up and take more responsibility, for to long they have looked to America and Europe to bear the brunt while every year becoming the countries adding to the issue. That in and off itself has had a good effect in driving behaviors to a better place, however when he first announced it you should have noticed the flurry of statements from all governors in terms of they controlled the state and that the environment would still be a critical action that they were looking at and driving. The US strides in these areas are a high priority in every sense of the matter, solar and wind is flourishing, Hydrogen is being driven forward on numerous points as the fuel of the future. All the major energy companies are turning to carbon capture and storage, Trump and his administration are helping in numerous areas but are refusing to give more money to the UN/Paris Agreement.
I posted a while back regarding small nuclear reactors (SNR's) the Trump administration approved the license to go in to production and this week awarded a $1.4 Billion federal grant to kick start the first SNR in the world, present prognosis is power 2027 and growing. Numerous countries around the world have signed up to this program and without nuclear there is no way to meet the objects of the Paris accord, they have failed miserably in the last two decades to get anywhere near there targets when America was pouring money in. New Energy is flourishing here and the business rationale will continue to drive that change not Trump or the federal government, the headlines are very misleading at times.
Re: The next American President?
Trump wants to restrict counting of all ballots to election day despite there being millions more mail-in votes to be counted!
https://twitter.com/grace_panetta/statu ... 4676922370
https://twitter.com/grace_panetta/statu ... 4676922370
Re: The next American President?
Vegas. Do you have your health insurance thru the ACA or do you have your insurance thru your job or private coverage. ?
I am retired and get my coverage thru ACA. It costs me $2000 a month in tax credits and a deductible of $13000 per year. These figures are slightly less than during the Obama era but are still insanely high. So how much do you pay ? By the way I have no underlying conditions
I am retired and get my coverage thru ACA. It costs me $2000 a month in tax credits and a deductible of $13000 per year. These figures are slightly less than during the Obama era but are still insanely high. So how much do you pay ? By the way I have no underlying conditions
Re: The next American President?
FC
we have ours through work, we have not looked at retirement & what is the best way, my sister is retired and uses private insurance. With ACA is that because you are below retirement age, does Medicaid kick in when you hit retirement age or does ACA continue, I have not looked into this, hence why I ask.
National health spending increased from $2.60 trillion in 2010 to $3.65 trillion in 2018. ... Some of that increase is due to the expansion of health care coverage, which increased access to services for newly covered families. Thus, the ACA did not reduce the level of health care spending. I would have thought like many things as time goes by prices increase, usually inline with GDP increases, very little goes down, it's definitely a worry and an outrageous cost, especially to Brit's and I suppose Europeans.
we have ours through work, we have not looked at retirement & what is the best way, my sister is retired and uses private insurance. With ACA is that because you are below retirement age, does Medicaid kick in when you hit retirement age or does ACA continue, I have not looked into this, hence why I ask.
National health spending increased from $2.60 trillion in 2010 to $3.65 trillion in 2018. ... Some of that increase is due to the expansion of health care coverage, which increased access to services for newly covered families. Thus, the ACA did not reduce the level of health care spending. I would have thought like many things as time goes by prices increase, usually inline with GDP increases, very little goes down, it's definitely a worry and an outrageous cost, especially to Brit's and I suppose Europeans.
Re: The next American President?
Kate. I retired in Florida in 2008. I became a citizen in 2014. I have not worked in USA and therefore do not qualify for Medicare or Social Security. Nor do I expect any. I do qualify for ACA which you lose if you get MediCare. As I don’t qualify then I continue to get ACA which is basically only of use in catastrophic situations. Hopefully I won’t need it for a long time
This user liked this post: KateR
Re: The next American President?
But of course illegal immigrants do get free healthcare if they live in California or anywhere in the US if Biden wins
Re: The next American President?
Thanks for replying DA. Much of that is a good summary. It's a real shame about the penultimate paragraph in particular, which is entirely wrong about me. It is sad that you are unable/unwilling to see a different viewpoint on the best way to tackle racism. I would like to keep the door open.Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:06 pmA picture was taken showing that there was an activity (DEI Session) where white people and people of colour were split into separate groups for the purpose of that session
It has been claimed that this was a training/learning session where the employees were taught or given information
There has been no evidence or first hand accounts that this was the case
The institution who have never tried to deny the picture was real are the only people to provide an explanation of what this was about and they advised the following
- In 2019 consultants were brought in to help with concerns raised around institutional racial equity within the workplace
- The consultants recommended as a first action to hold listening sessions to help them understand what the current concerns and situation was
- The listening sessions were voluntary for employees except for management. It was compulsory for management because as part of their role they need to be able to support their people so they needed awareness of what has taken place. The implication here is that as it is just a listening session the managers would not have to contribute if they did not wish to
There is no evidence to suggest what KCLS is saying is not the truth and there is no more context provided around what part of the overall process did these sessions make up or what was the reasoning for splitting up the groups by race
- The aim of the session was to enable the consultants to go away and create a report and recommendations on any positive actions that could be taken help address any concerns expressed around racial equity
Without any facts (other than a picture and the KCLS statement) or any context around why consultants were brought in (what was seen as the benefit of dividing the groups, what other activity's were carried out with the employees, how much buy in and engagement there was, what was the output from the whole experience) Android decided that this surmounted to racial segregation and linked it to fears around CRT & White Privilege Android went on to suggest that KCLS were lying and using lawyers to carefully word their response.
I took a different approach and looked up the story on various SM sites to try and get a feel of what was going on (a listening session to inform me you may say). I found the following
- 2 right wing media sites running the story of which one is a far right propaganda machine and the other has a huge right wing bias and is reportedly not to hot on facts
- One of the reports linked to a Twitter feed where I could see it was a story being run from someone who's focus seems to be alt right and CRT issues with an echo chamber following
My conclusion was that the most reliable source of information was that of KCLS so unless given good reason to doubt their version of events thats what I will go with
- The official statement from KCLS I have detailed above
The fact that this story has gone nowhere and not been picked up by any reputable news source is a red flag that it is no more than agenda driven race baiting by people who are likely profiting for website clicks or followers
In terms of my sources that Android as asked for I will explain that I havent claimed to know more that what is in the statement provided by KCLS but in the interest of good debate I put forward some examples to argue against the KCLS must be lying as there is no good reason for spitting people by colour other than to run a racially segregated training session
My first set of examples were of my own real experiences working for a large company of how it addresses societal issues. I explained that I have attended sessions on Mental Health and LGBQT that were open discussion sessions for us the employees and nothing like training sessions and was always optional. I also added that this week the company has asked people to participate in a survey about diversity & inclusivity
My second example was again my own experience this time working with consultants. Whenever I have seen consultants come in to a business the first thing they always want to do is listen and understand.
My final example was to highlight that there are genuinely good intentioned reasons why when addressing race equity they might want to segregate the groups. I used a recent channel 4 series where this approach was taken as it was looking to tackle unconscious bias and those behind it had found you get far more open and productive conversations when you get people into groups based on colour for a small part of the process.
My examples were there to illustrate that the claim KCLS made is perfectly plausible and much more reliable than the news sources trying to attack them or as in Androids case someone looking at a picture with no context and jumping to some pretty damning conclusions
I havent bothered replying Android because your admission that you just saw the picture and based you whole premise on KLCS confirming the picture was real whilst dismissing everything else from them has confirmed all I needed to know. I am not interested in political point scoring or trying to win an argument but I detest people who use subjects such as racism, homophobia or any bigotry as a political tool and Ive seen evidence of this in your previous postings on other topics and this conversation just strengthened that view
I got what I wanted from this exchange from your final admission to which I didnt reply so I am happy to let you carry on as you so wish
We have both now confirmed that our comments were based mainly on 3 things:
1) the photo
2) the statement by KCLS and
3) our own life experience
As you have criticised me in your post, I think it is only fair to point out some inconsistencies in your account.
You have agreed that the photo is real. As a reminder, the photo shows one area set aside for "People of Color" and another area set aside for "People who are White". You have said that there is some missing context on why KCLS "split people by colour" (your words). You said that there were good intentioned reasons (you may have forgotten that I agreed with you on this point) to "segregate" (your word) people. But you have continuously criticised me for pointing out that people were racially segregated. If you cannot see the inconsistency in your criticism of me and your own comments on the position, I really do not know what to say to make it clear.
You have now informed me that the extra detail you added about what probably took place, above and beyond what was in the statement, is speculation based on your own experience. I do not have a problem with this and your comments about what the goals and likely processes were seem reasonable. But you have not extended the same courtesy to me on reading and interpreting the KCLS statement. I have many years experience in business and dealing with legal departments and lawyers and cases of potential corporate wrongdoing. So I noticed that KCLS denied that they run a "racially segregated training program". The word training is significant as you recognised (I think you tried to trip me up with it without realising I was already on to it - you certainly could have made it clear if you wanted to - but no matter) and we have already discussed what does and what does not constitute "training" which could fill up plenty of lawyers time. But the use of the word "program" rather than "sessions" is also significant. They stated instead that they ran "caucused listening sessions". A gap has been created between what would be an illegal "racially segregated training program" and a harmless sounding "caucused listening sessions". We know that the "caucus" was based on skin colour without any doubt. Whether the sessions involved any element of "training" is more debatable. I expressed my own view on that based on my own life experience of both consultant led staff sessions and corporate backside covering. As I have said before, regardless of training or not training, racially segregated sessions took place and that is the reason for my objection.
Just to confirm I oppose racism because it is wrong. I also have personal reasons for it being a sensitive topic for me. Please stop trying to attribute other untrue motives to me.
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
so you mean Biden's plan ?!AndrewJB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:41 pmhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ ... nistration
Trumps environment policy aim - to achieve energy independence for the US - is good. His means to achieving this - via fossil fuels - is bad. The lack of concern he has for the environment is terrible.
Promoting renewable energy as the road to energy independence would provide Trump with a way to boost US technology and innovation, in addition to domestic manufacturing. It could all be a completely made in America solution to energy dependence and a sluggish economy, as well as stepping up on the world stage to do their part against global warming. With such a huge internal market, they could easily end up as a major international supplier (maybe even operator) of renewable energy for other countries. Win win.
Rather than taking this path, he’s cut US environmental standards and is willing to allow resource extraction in national parks.
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
The Mrs sorts it all out so I don't know of exact figures, it's through her job. She said it's gone up, I know my prescriptions have gone up - 1 went up from 10 to 30 ! Unless there is a dramatic change (which there wont be) we won't retire in the US that's for sure - the only thing I'll miss is the sunshine thoughFCBurnley wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 10:25 pmVegas. Do you have your health insurance thru the ACA or do you have your insurance thru your job or private coverage. ?
I am retired and get my coverage thru ACA. It costs me $2000 a month in tax credits and a deductible of $13000 per year. These figures are slightly less than during the Obama era but are still insanely high. So how much do you pay ? By the way I have no underlying conditions
If your coverage is ACA then you must be shitting yourself at the moment if Trump gets back in
-
- Posts: 920
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:03 pm
- Been Liked: 317 times
- Has Liked: 225 times
- Location: at work,for a change!
Re: The next American President?
My family of 5 get our health care through my business. I have a pre existing condition going back to 2000, which meant I could not get insured with my wife and boys as the cost and coverage were awful, until the ACA happened. We are now all on one policy with low deductables. My eldest son, has just been diagnosed with Celiacs. He is still on my policy,fortunately for him. If the ACA is overturned in the super magnificent chicken supreme court, as now expected after 71 attempts by the Republicans (yes 71) I and my son will most likely be on single person,shitty policies again. We pay $1800 per month currently, and we also receive some dental coverage.
The ACA is not perfect.Nobody, especially Obama, said it was. It was always meant to be improved upon. I do not see any evidence of a Republican health plan other than a return to how it was before the ACA was introduced.
Maybe I have just not come across it. Happy to be educated in the Republican Health care plan,if there is one.
The ACA is not perfect.Nobody, especially Obama, said it was. It was always meant to be improved upon. I do not see any evidence of a Republican health plan other than a return to how it was before the ACA was introduced.
Maybe I have just not come across it. Happy to be educated in the Republican Health care plan,if there is one.
These 2 users liked this post: Vegas Claret Taffy on the wing
Re: The next American President?
The American Health Care Act of 2017 (often shortened to the AHCA or nicknamed Trumpcare) was a bill in the 115th United States Congress.
As you know this was defeated and I think most people are very happy it was, Republicans definitely need a new, much plan. Business Insider stated that the AHCA was "the least popular major bill in decades", and major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, strongly condemned the bill and excoriated its supporters in Congress.
Before the ACA, the uninsured rate hovered around 15 percent of the population. By 2018, that rate dropped to 8.5 percent, resulting in 18 million more people with coverage.
Efforts to achieve other policy goals were less successful. The ACA did not stem high and rapidly rising health care costs care for all Americans. Delivery system reforms advanced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center have shown disappointing results, and mechanisms intended to rein in federal costs have been dropped. Despite the promise of affordability, consumers continue to cite medical expenses as their No. one economic concern.
During his 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised voters that his health care plan would cut annual premiums by $2,500. That estimate assumed that the plan would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year, or about 8 percent of national health spending projected for 2009. Savings were attributed to policies that would reduce insurers’ administrative expenses, expand use of health information technology (addressed in the 2009 economic stimulus legislation rather than the ACA), and expand prevention and chronic disease management programs.
National health expenditure (NHE) data show that such savings have not been realized.
Other factors contribute to health care spending growth, including the introduction of new treatments and changes in factors affecting population health. Nonetheless, it is implausible to suggest that the ACA has bent the cost curve down. Do you think Joe will bring your costs down?
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
no probably not, but I know for certain Trump won't - he's had 4 years to do it and they've gone up - along with the cost of food, fuel, gas, electricity.KateR wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:22 am
The American Health Care Act of 2017 (often shortened to the AHCA or nicknamed Trumpcare) was a bill in the 115th United States Congress.
As you know this was defeated and I think most people are very happy it was, Republicans definitely need a new, much plan. Business Insider stated that the AHCA was "the least popular major bill in decades", and major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, strongly condemned the bill and excoriated its supporters in Congress.
Before the ACA, the uninsured rate hovered around 15 percent of the population. By 2018, that rate dropped to 8.5 percent, resulting in 18 million more people with coverage.
Efforts to achieve other policy goals were less successful. The ACA did not stem high and rapidly rising health care costs care for all Americans. Delivery system reforms advanced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center have shown disappointing results, and mechanisms intended to rein in federal costs have been dropped. Despite the promise of affordability, consumers continue to cite medical expenses as their No. one economic concern.
During his 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised voters that his health care plan would cut annual premiums by $2,500. That estimate assumed that the plan would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year, or about 8 percent of national health spending projected for 2009. Savings were attributed to policies that would reduce insurers’ administrative expenses, expand use of health information technology (addressed in the 2009 economic stimulus legislation rather than the ACA), and expand prevention and chronic disease management programs.
National health expenditure (NHE) data show that such savings have not been realized.
Other factors contribute to health care spending growth, including the introduction of new treatments and changes in factors affecting population health. Nonetheless, it is implausible to suggest that the ACA has bent the cost curve down.
Do you think Joe will bring your costs down?
Let's have it right, the real reason Obama didn't get things done is because of McConnell - he's even come out and said it himself. Nothing will ever get done in America with him or Pelosi still breathing. I fully expect Trump will get back in via the court though because he's a ****
This user liked this post: KateR
-
- Posts: 847
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:17 am
- Been Liked: 111 times
- Has Liked: 71 times
Re: The next American President?
The AHCA wasn't a health care plan, it was a bill to repeal the ACA and nothing more. That's why it was voted down with the help of the dying John McCain.KateR wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:22 am
The American Health Care Act of 2017 (often shortened to the AHCA or nicknamed Trumpcare) was a bill in the 115th United States Congress.
As you know this was defeated and I think most people are very happy it was, Republicans definitely need a new, much plan. Business Insider stated that the AHCA was "the least popular major bill in decades", and major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, strongly condemned the bill and excoriated its supporters in Congress.
Before the ACA, the uninsured rate hovered around 15 percent of the population. By 2018, that rate dropped to 8.5 percent, resulting in 18 million more people with coverage.
Efforts to achieve other policy goals were less successful. The ACA did not stem high and rapidly rising health care costs care for all Americans. Delivery system reforms advanced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center have shown disappointing results, and mechanisms intended to rein in federal costs have been dropped. Despite the promise of affordability, consumers continue to cite medical expenses as their No. one economic concern.
During his 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised voters that his health care plan would cut annual premiums by $2,500. That estimate assumed that the plan would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year, or about 8 percent of national health spending projected for 2009. Savings were attributed to policies that would reduce insurers’ administrative expenses, expand use of health information technology (addressed in the 2009 economic stimulus legislation rather than the ACA), and expand prevention and chronic disease management programs.
National health expenditure (NHE) data show that such savings have not been realized.
Other factors contribute to health care spending growth, including the introduction of new treatments and changes in factors affecting population health. Nonetheless, it is implausible to suggest that the ACA has bent the cost curve down. Do you think Joe will bring your costs down?
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
I have a pre-existing, the day my health care coverage goes (for whatever reason) I will leave the US and never come back.grapidianclaret wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:30 amMy family of 5 get our health care through my business. I have a pre existing condition going back to 2000, which meant I could not get insured with my wife and boys as the cost and coverage were awful, until the ACA happened. We are now all on one policy with low deductables. My eldest son, has just been diagnosed with Celiacs. He is still on my policy,fortunately for him. If the ACA is overturned in the super magnificent chicken supreme court, as now expected after 71 attempts by the Republicans (yes 71) I and my son will most likely be on single person,shitty policies again. We pay $1800 per month currently, and we also receive some dental coverage.
The ACA is not perfect.Nobody, especially Obama, said it was. It was always meant to be improved upon. I do not see any evidence of a Republican health plan other than a return to how it was before the ACA was introduced.
Maybe I have just not come across it. Happy to be educated in the Republican Health care plan,if there is one.
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: The next American President?
Follow the money.......Trump is heavily supported by the fossil fuel industry.AndrewJB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:41 pmhttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ ... nistration
Trumps environment policy aim - to achieve energy independence for the US - is good. His means to achieving this - via fossil fuels - is bad. The lack of concern he has for the environment is terrible.
Promoting renewable energy as the road to energy independence would provide Trump with a way to boost US technology and innovation, in addition to domestic manufacturing. It could all be a completely made in America solution to energy dependence and a sluggish economy, as well as stepping up on the world stage to do their part against global warming. With such a huge internal market, they could easily end up as a major international supplier (maybe even operator) of renewable energy for other countries. Win win.
Rather than taking this path, he’s cut US environmental standards and is willing to allow resource extraction in national parks.
He's not interested in anything except money.
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: The next American President?
Trump is, has been, and always will be a disaster for the Environment.KateR wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:30 pmAndrew,
Global Warming is a global issue as you well know, not an American problem, one big issue for decades has been how the UN and the Paris accord were set up and so many lay people are clueless on what is and what is going on. Maybe for all the wrong reasons in one sense but walking away from the Paris agreement in terms of not paying the money has made the real polluters sit up and take more responsibility, for to long they have looked to America and Europe to bear the brunt while every year becoming the countries adding to the issue. That in and off itself has had a good effect in driving behaviors to a better place, however when he first announced it you should have noticed the flurry of statements from all governors in terms of they controlled the state and that the environment would still be a critical action that they were looking at and driving. The US strides in these areas are a high priority in every sense of the matter, solar and wind is flourishing, Hydrogen is being driven forward on numerous points as the fuel of the future. All the major energy companies are turning to carbon capture and storage, Trump and his administration are helping in numerous areas but are refusing to give more money to the UN/Paris Agreement.
I posted a while back regarding small nuclear reactors (SNR's) the Trump administration approved the license to go in to production and this week awarded a $1.4 Billion federal grant to kick start the first SNR in the world, present prognosis is power 2027 and growing. Numerous countries around the world have signed up to this program and without nuclear there is no way to meet the objects of the Paris accord, they have failed miserably in the last two decades to get anywhere near there targets when America was pouring money in. New Energy is flourishing here and the business rationale will continue to drive that change not Trump or the federal government, the headlines are very misleading at times.
Wether it be car emissions or the clean water/ clean air acts, he's against it all........Remember, Wind turbines cause Cancer?
I'm going to take a guess that you or your Husband are employed in the oil industry in Houston.
Maybe this puts you in an awkward position personally............But there is no way to defend Trump on the Environment!
This user liked this post: KateR
-
- Posts: 8528
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:22 pm
- Been Liked: 2889 times
- Has Liked: 1763 times
Re: The next American President?
well he's had farage acting as his corner man in Arizona, embarrassingly grovelling speech it was too.
described by trump in the orchestrated introduction as "one of the most powerful men in europe"
Farage takes the microphone and talks of trump as the most resilient and bravest men he's ever met.
described by trump in the orchestrated introduction as "one of the most powerful men in europe"
Farage takes the microphone and talks of trump as the most resilient and bravest men he's ever met.
-
- Posts: 4075
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
- Been Liked: 1508 times
- Has Liked: 581 times
Re: The next American President?
Oddly, the ‘damning evidence’ Tucker Carlson had about Hunter Biden was “lost in the post”.
TC and his staff never thought to take copies of such mind blowing evidence of course...absolute mugs.
TC and his staff never thought to take copies of such mind blowing evidence of course...absolute mugs.
Re: The next American President?
Imagine how much better the US could be doing without Trump as president.KateR wrote: ↑Wed Oct 28, 2020 9:30 pmAndrew,
Global Warming is a global issue as you well know, not an American problem, one big issue for decades has been how the UN and the Paris accord were set up and so many lay people are clueless on what is and what is going on. Maybe for all the wrong reasons in one sense but walking away from the Paris agreement in terms of not paying the money has made the real polluters sit up and take more responsibility, for to long they have looked to America and Europe to bear the brunt while every year becoming the countries adding to the issue. That in and off itself has had a good effect in driving behaviors to a better place, however when he first announced it you should have noticed the flurry of statements from all governors in terms of they controlled the state and that the environment would still be a critical action that they were looking at and driving. The US strides in these areas are a high priority in every sense of the matter, solar and wind is flourishing, Hydrogen is being driven forward on numerous points as the fuel of the future. All the major energy companies are turning to carbon capture and storage, Trump and his administration are helping in numerous areas but are refusing to give more money to the UN/Paris Agreement.
I posted a while back regarding small nuclear reactors (SNR's) the Trump administration approved the license to go in to production and this week awarded a $1.4 Billion federal grant to kick start the first SNR in the world, present prognosis is power 2027 and growing. Numerous countries around the world have signed up to this program and without nuclear there is no way to meet the objects of the Paris accord, they have failed miserably in the last two decades to get anywhere near there targets when America was pouring money in. New Energy is flourishing here and the business rationale will continue to drive that change not Trump or the federal government, the headlines are very misleading at times.
This user liked this post: Taffy on the wing
-
- Posts: 7313
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
- Been Liked: 1827 times
- Has Liked: 3965 times
Re: The next American President?
He also said that a vote for Trump was vote for "decency".Wile E Coyote wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 8:48 am
Farage takes the microphone and talks of trump as the most resilient and bravest men he's ever met.
Judge for yourselves. What does this say about Farage's standards / moral code?
Re: The next American President?
This sentence did not age well did it? It could hardly have been more ill-thought-out or ill-timed. Check out today's news from the EHRC.
Being sceptical about sources makes sense but denying the truth due to the source does not.
-
- Posts: 847
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:17 am
- Been Liked: 111 times
- Has Liked: 71 times
Re: The next American President?
Some sources are not credible, whether they are right about something or not.
Alex Jones could say something true, but I wont believe him, and without a respectable le source that backs up what he says I'll be more inclined to believe the opposite than what he says. Me not believing him when he speaks the truth wouldn't be my fault, it'd be his for previously lying and acting insane so much of the time.
Alex Jones could say something true, but I wont believe him, and without a respectable le source that backs up what he says I'll be more inclined to believe the opposite than what he says. Me not believing him when he speaks the truth wouldn't be my fault, it'd be his for previously lying and acting insane so much of the time.
Re: The next American President?
That’s amazing. Exactly my thoughts on you.PeterWilton wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 11:26 amSome sources are not credible, whether they are right about something or not.
Alex Jones could say something true, but I wont believe him, and without a respectable le source that backs up what he says I'll be more inclined to believe the opposite than what he says. Me not believing him when he speaks the truth wouldn't be my fault, it'd be his for previously lying and acting insane so much of the time.
These 2 users liked this post: HahaYeah KateR
Re: The next American President?
I have no idea who Alex Jones is but I understand your thinking here. Obviously if you then discovered what he said was true you would not carry on disbelieving it.
-
- Posts: 847
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:17 am
- Been Liked: 111 times
- Has Liked: 71 times
-
- Posts: 847
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:17 am
- Been Liked: 111 times
- Has Liked: 71 times
Re: The next American President?
Read your original post. That is my responsePeterWilton wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 12:04 pmThat's a rather weird attack out of nowhere, but OK.
However I wouldn't make a claim I couldn't back up with facts from a credible outlet of information.
Re: The next American President?
Actually both of us have been involved in the energy business for a long time, mostly oil & gas yes, but also power and mining occasionally with the same company.Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:08 amTrump is, has been, and always will be a disaster for the Environment.
Wether it be car emissions or the clean water/ clean air acts, he's against it all........Remember, Wind turbines cause Cancer?
I'm going to take a guess that you or your Husband are employed in the oil industry in Houston.
Maybe this puts you in an awkward position personally............But there is no way to defend Trump on the Environment!
However, the difference is I started late 2019 looking at alternative energy because I realized the O&G business is in reality a business going out of business, what I have been doing is working with a few companies advising in how to help them change from solely O&G in to the new energy transition business, including wind/solar/hydrogen. I do know a little bit of what I am talking about and I have an open mind, I have been successful with some things his month in terms of trying to make a difference in Global Warming, tiny in the grand scheme of things but for one company a very positive step, I am also passionate about it. Therefore, I believe I can make a meaningful contribution to what is and what is not good, including what Trump policies have resulted in, if you don't want to believe my opinion then that's also fine. It is just the same token when anyone says Trump is destroying the planet or is totally against global warming, I clearly don't agree with that and I don't work with absolutes either, plus I know things about Joe's Green Plan that I could criticize but I don't because it's not all wrong by any means.
apologies if long winded
This user liked this post: Vegas Claret
-
- Posts: 1113
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:35 am
- Been Liked: 286 times
- Has Liked: 139 times
Re: The next American President?
Who do you think will be next US president KateR?
And do you have any concerns about The Trump’s campaign’s efforts to depress number of votes cast in battleground States?
And do you have any concerns about The Trump’s campaign’s efforts to depress number of votes cast in battleground States?
Re: The next American President?
the grass is always greener for so many, but I always say be careful what you wish for also, personally I and my family including my sister and her married families have not really seen any great change from Bush to Obama and through 4 years of Trump. I can well imagine numerous people have. On a personal level I did not like Bush junior although I did like Bush senior, I liked Obama and I really don't like Trump, these are just my thoughts of them without meeting them, I dislike Trump by far the most as the person.
However, given it's just a few days until we know, perhaps its time to reflect not on the person but on what he has or has not achieved regarding his campaign promises last time, which is what it should mainly be about, his and the Republican promises:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37982000
As always, I hear both sides and the promises, I like things from both sides, while at the same time I don't like things from both sides. People voting can look at the individuals or look at what they are promising to do in terms of, how will it effect me and my family or how will it effect American in general and to a lessor extent the world for the next four years.
This user liked this post: AndrewJB
Re: The next American President?
I’m not sure of the relevance. How does the EHRC report relate to the made up story you got from a right-wing parody Twitter account?
If you can find a post from me defending antisemitism, pretending it doesn’t exist, or suggesting we should all just ignore it and it will go away (and not just attacking the hypocrites like Rowls who use it as a political tool, whilst not caring about the Tories’ Islamophobia problem), then I’ll be interested to see it.
-
- Posts: 16764
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:05 am
- Been Liked: 3778 times
- Has Liked: 7573 times
- Location: Derbyshire
Re: The next American President?
One of the most powerful men in Europe, is our Nigel, according to his rotund satsuma friend.HahaYeah wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:04 amFarage and Trump in Arizona.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3o6G4VwG0rI
Another Trump truism that at the risk of spreading fake news, is thankfully, a croc o crap.
Re: The next American President?
I voted, Trump 2020
These 2 users liked this post: HahaYeah FCBurnley
Re: The next American President?
I think Biden will win, both the popular vote by a considerable margin and the important votes by a small margin, yet Trump could still just edge it by legal means but I don't think so.Cubanclaret wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:01 pmWho do you think will be next US president KateR?
And do you have any concerns about The Trump’s campaign’s efforts to depress number of votes cast in battleground States?
I always have concerns around ALL politicians when making statements to influence the electorate, and Trump more so than anyone, so yes I do.
EDIT:
I also believe (but just my opinion) that Trump would have won another 4 years but for C-19, it's irrelevant in the grand scheme now but thought I would make my position clear on the whole issue, politics unlikely to be the same again for a while however the really big question for me is: Assuming Trump loses as I think, will he want to remain as Republican leader, and if so will the Republicans want him to, so some Trump drama to come even beyond the election results
Last edited by KateR on Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
I reflect on the person more than anything at this point, policy is spin for the most part - nobody can tell me Trump is anything but a ****KateR wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:04 pmthe grass is always greener for so many, but I always say be careful what you wish for also, personally I and my family including my sister and her married families have not really seen any great change from Bush to Obama and through 4 years of Trump. I can well imagine numerous people have. On a personal level I did not like Bush junior although I did like Bush senior, I liked Obama and I really don't like Trump, these are just my thoughts of them without meeting them, I dislike Trump by far the most as the person.
However, given it's just a few days until we know, perhaps its time to reflect not on the person but on what he has or has not achieved regarding his campaign promises last time, which is what it should mainly be about, his and the Republican promises:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37982000
As always, I hear both sides and the promises, I like things from both sides, while at the same time I don't like things from both sides. People voting can look at the individuals or look at what they are promising to do in terms of, how will it effect me and my family or how will it effect American in general and to a lessor extent the world for the next four years.
This user liked this post: Taffy on the wing
Re: The next American President?
Vegas,Vegas Claret wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:51 pmI reflect on the person more than anything at this point, policy is spin for the most part - nobody can tell me Trump is anything but a ****
I think I got that picture a while back
This user liked this post: Vegas Claret
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: The next American President?
The combination of Collusion by the Insurance companies and a Republican house of representatives & effectively the Senate too (thanks to the so-called Blue dogs). Allowed the Plan to be gutted!.... Just the inability for the Government to negotiate the price of drugs alone raised costs massively.KateR wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:22 am
The American Health Care Act of 2017 (often shortened to the AHCA or nicknamed Trumpcare) was a bill in the 115th United States Congress.
As you know this was defeated and I think most people are very happy it was, Republicans definitely need a new, much plan. Business Insider stated that the AHCA was "the least popular major bill in decades", and major medical organizations, including the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics, strongly condemned the bill and excoriated its supporters in Congress.
Before the ACA, the uninsured rate hovered around 15 percent of the population. By 2018, that rate dropped to 8.5 percent, resulting in 18 million more people with coverage.
Efforts to achieve other policy goals were less successful. The ACA did not stem high and rapidly rising health care costs care for all Americans. Delivery system reforms advanced by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Innovation Center have shown disappointing results, and mechanisms intended to rein in federal costs have been dropped. Despite the promise of affordability, consumers continue to cite medical expenses as their No. one economic concern.
During his 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama promised voters that his health care plan would cut annual premiums by $2,500. That estimate assumed that the plan would produce savings of at least $200 billion a year, or about 8 percent of national health spending projected for 2009. Savings were attributed to policies that would reduce insurers’ administrative expenses, expand use of health information technology (addressed in the 2009 economic stimulus legislation rather than the ACA), and expand prevention and chronic disease management programs.
National health expenditure (NHE) data show that such savings have not been realized.
Other factors contribute to health care spending growth, including the introduction of new treatments and changes in factors affecting population health. Nonetheless, it is implausible to suggest that the ACA has bent the cost curve down. Do you think Joe will bring your costs down?
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: The next American President?
Imagine how the US could look today if it hadn't spent Trillions on the unwinnable Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Homelessness, Hunger, infrastructure & the environment could all be solved.
-
- Posts: 30717
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11060 times
- Has Liked: 5663 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: The next American President?
the wars the republicans took us in to ?Taffy on the wing wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:12 pmImagine how the US could look today if it hadn't spent Trillions on the unwinnable Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Homelessness, Hunger, infrastructure & the environment could all be solved.
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
-
- Posts: 847
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 2:17 am
- Been Liked: 111 times
- Has Liked: 71 times
Re: The next American President?
It's fine. NJ stands for New Jersey so his vote will end up being worth exactly as much as he is.
-
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:41 am
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 3192 times
Re: The next American President?
Yep!......
Re: The next American President?
It does not seem that difficult to me but no worries if you cannot see it.Greenmile wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:17 pmI’m not sure of the relevance. How does the EHRC report relate to the made up story you got from a right-wing parody Twitter account?
If you can find a post from me defending antisemitism, pretending it doesn’t exist, or suggesting we should all just ignore it and it will go away (and not just attacking the hypocrites like Rowls who use it as a political tool, whilst not caring about the Tories’ Islamophobia problem), then I’ll be interested to see it.
One more time on KCLS then. The Twitter account reproduced a photo. I am not aware of anyone, other than you, claiming that it was made up.
As luck would have it, ECHR reported today. Maybe I missed you criticising Corbyn over antisemitism but I do remember you claiming that a bad source (Rowls in your opinion) was smearing him. Last year I tried to explain to you that stories from what you consider to be a bad source (I think I said Daily Mail) could prove to be true and you should look at the evidence. My understanding of this matter has been proved correct.
I was pointing out the similarities in the two situations and the coincidental timing. If you wish to stick to your guns that you understand these things and I don't that's fine. (But please don't make stuff up about me that forces me to do yet another post)!
Re: The next American President?
Any evidence of this? I searched my posts for the word “smear” and all I came up with was this, which, ironically involved you taking my words out of context, failing to understand my point, and making stuff up about me.android wrote: ↑Thu Oct 29, 2020 7:39 pmIt does not seem that difficult to me but no worries if you cannot see it.
One more time on KCLS then. The Twitter account reproduced a photo. I am not aware of anyone, other than you, claiming that it was made up.
As luck would have it, ECHR reported today. Maybe I missed you criticising Corbyn over antisemitism but I do remember you claiming that a bad source (Rowls in your opinion) was smearing him. Last year I tried to explain to you that stories from what you consider to be a bad source (I think I said Daily Mail) could prove to be true and you should look at the evidence. My understanding of this matter has been proved correct.
I was pointing out the similarities in the two situations and the coincidental timing. If you wish to stick to your guns that you understand these things and I don't that's fine. (But please don't make stuff up about me that forces me to do yet another post)!
http://www.uptheclarets.com/messageboar ... r#p1024253
On the KCLS point (once more, for the hard of understanding), I’m not suggesting the photo was made up, but you’ve taken the Spiked columnists interpretation of it (which was made up), swallowed it whole, and then regurgitated it wholesale on here, even in the face of a contradictory statement from KCLS themselves. And you’re still claiming you’ve been “proved correct”