Janelle Monae - Tightrope
Tuesday, March 07, 2017
What Do Conservatives Want?
One of my Trump loving Facebook friends sometime after the election posted a standard anti-Obamacare screed followed by a fairly thoughtful and intelligent description of what an ideal health care system should look like. It wasn't A+ health care wonk material, but it was decent enough. The thing is, though, what he described almost down to the level of comma placement in the legislation was... Obamacare.
I'm not one to argue politics on the Facebook, except for parking and curb cut policies, but this intrigued me so I pointed out that what he had described was almost precisely (and it really was, not just sorta like it) Obamacare, without the mandate. I'm not sure if he realized this or not, and I didn't want to be arguing on the facebook so I didn't continue the conversation, but the mandate was enough for him to hang his creepingsocialismblahblahblah rant on and declare Obamacare evil. And, ok, fine, I think the mandate is actually pretty stupid. The penalty is enough to piss people off, but not really enough to make them buy shitty unaffordable insurance if they aren't getting generous enough subsidies. In other words, it's probably not unreasonable to just take the penalty and be pissed off about it than to buy shit insurance you can't afford. So it isn't really much of a stick. Carrots - making the subsidies more generous - would've been better. Also, too, just sign people up and send them damn bill if you really want to force them to have insurance. Force, don't nudge.
I doubt all conservatives agree with his support of Obamacare whether he knew it or not, but I don't actually have any clue what they do want, other than the most uncharitable possibilities I can imagine. I don't mean rich assholes or the sociopaths Congress, I mean the great mass of deplorables who think Obamacare is full communism and is sapping their precious bodily fluids. Practically everyone has to deal with this health insurance bullshit.
I'm not one to argue politics on the Facebook, except for parking and curb cut policies, but this intrigued me so I pointed out that what he had described was almost precisely (and it really was, not just sorta like it) Obamacare, without the mandate. I'm not sure if he realized this or not, and I didn't want to be arguing on the facebook so I didn't continue the conversation, but the mandate was enough for him to hang his creepingsocialismblahblahblah rant on and declare Obamacare evil. And, ok, fine, I think the mandate is actually pretty stupid. The penalty is enough to piss people off, but not really enough to make them buy shitty unaffordable insurance if they aren't getting generous enough subsidies. In other words, it's probably not unreasonable to just take the penalty and be pissed off about it than to buy shit insurance you can't afford. So it isn't really much of a stick. Carrots - making the subsidies more generous - would've been better. Also, too, just sign people up and send them damn bill if you really want to force them to have insurance. Force, don't nudge.
I doubt all conservatives agree with his support of Obamacare whether he knew it or not, but I don't actually have any clue what they do want, other than the most uncharitable possibilities I can imagine. I don't mean rich assholes or the sociopaths Congress, I mean the great mass of deplorables who think Obamacare is full communism and is sapping their precious bodily fluids. Practically everyone has to deal with this health insurance bullshit.
Civilitude
Official Washington always discovers the importance of civility when Republicans are in charge. Pointing out that the president is a liar, or that bad policies will kill people (hell even that war will kill people), is evidence that our holy political discourse is in decline. What we need is Honest Civil Debate, because fuck if I know why we're supposed to debate this crap all the time. Bigots are bigots, racists are racists, liars are liar, depriving people of necessary health care (including birth control and abortion) will kill them, and freedom bombs don't liberate anything other than souls. Very uncivil!
Good Deal!
Chaffetz: Americans may have to choose between new phone, health insurance https://t.co/G7TUtuLrrl pic.twitter.com/qA4PvGXlps
— Talking Points Memo (@TPM) March 7, 2017
This is the kind of thing which embodies everything about modern conservatives - a failure to understand the price/cost of anything, a failure to understand what people need to exist in contemporary society, and the belief the newfangled gagdgets are like the mythical welfare queen Cadillacs of yesteryear.
A new phone high end phone costs 500-800 bucks. If I could buy health insurance (Real, not bullshit) for my family for that I'd happily give up my new phone. Of course, the two years ago high end model phone costs $200. The somewhat shittier and not quite latest and greatest can probably be had for 50 bucks. Your older brother can probably give you a handmedown for free. So, phones are not really that expensive (service is in the US because of our shitty noncompetitive market and lax regulation, go to Yurp and pay 20 bucks per month max). Also they're the only way lots of people have regular internet access, so they're pretty much necessary. Smartphones are not luxury items, they're required.
But, hey, let everyone buy health insurance for the cost of a new iPhone. I'm on board with that! Put it in the Dem platform.
In The Beginning
I think it's kinda funny that everyone pretends "neoliberalism" is some new concept that appeared from the alt-left fever swamps fully formed in 2015 as a meaningless epithet, but it's word with a long tradition and meaning, whatever its applicability to any particular person or policy set.
Monday, March 06, 2017
Obamacare, But Much Shittier
Inevitably that would be the GOP plan, and apparently it is, though I don't have time right now to go deeper than that. I'm sure you will learn all you need to know on our finer cable news political programs.
Will It Be Legal For Kids To Ride Alone In A Self-Driving Car?
I'm a little bit kidding, but not entirely. Given the ratcheting up of the age at which "we" allow kids to do things without direct adult supervision - people are regularly confronted by authorities for leaving their kids (I don't mean toddlers in hot cars) in cars in parking lots - what would make leaving them in self-driving cars ok? But even more seriously, I do not think these self-driving car makers have seen a school car drop off line lately.
Navigating a school drop off line is exactly the kind of "last 500 feet" problem I just do not see these cars being able to handle. Ever (yes, ever is a long time, the singularity is coming eventually, blahblah).
Volkwagen on the future: "This new automobile is intelligent, it’s always available and the car even carries out functions independently. Sedric will drive the children to school and then take their parents to the office, look independently for a parking space, collects shopping that has been ordered, picks up a visitor from the station and a son from sports training – all at the touch of a button, with voice control or with a smartphone app – fully automatically, reliably and safely."
Navigating a school drop off line is exactly the kind of "last 500 feet" problem I just do not see these cars being able to handle. Ever (yes, ever is a long time, the singularity is coming eventually, blahblah).
Actually You're Traffic
Seattle isn't a city I've spent much time in (like 24 hours once), so I have no expert opinion about the specifics, other than being aware that water and bridges complicate things, but I do wish car fetishists would do the math and think seriously about just what capacity increases that would actually make a difference would entail.
What this means in practice, of course, is neighorhoods need to be razed to accommodate the suburbanites who wish to drive through them. There is no other way to "aborb the traffic" of a freeway, which carry 1800 cars per lane per hour at capacity. That's the point, and flaw, of freeways. They carry quite a few cars (though not with the capacity people think they have), but they have to dump them off into lower capacity roads eventually. Sometimes even in places where people live!
When suburbanites complain about lack of parking in Philadelphia (a related, but not identical issue, of people thinking that where I live needs to accommodate their wants for some reason), I joke that I would like to lead a convoy of 2000 cars from Philadelphia and go park them (legally!) in some random neighborhood in the suburbs and then just go wander around. People would flip their shit. The response to this is always something like, "what do you expect, you live in the city." Yes, yes, I do, but that doesn't mean I have to turn my neighborhood into a parking lot just for you.
Because Seattle straddles state freeways at their busiest points, it should be ready to absorb the traffic when they’re disrupted.
What this means in practice, of course, is neighorhoods need to be razed to accommodate the suburbanites who wish to drive through them. There is no other way to "aborb the traffic" of a freeway, which carry 1800 cars per lane per hour at capacity. That's the point, and flaw, of freeways. They carry quite a few cars (though not with the capacity people think they have), but they have to dump them off into lower capacity roads eventually. Sometimes even in places where people live!
When suburbanites complain about lack of parking in Philadelphia (a related, but not identical issue, of people thinking that where I live needs to accommodate their wants for some reason), I joke that I would like to lead a convoy of 2000 cars from Philadelphia and go park them (legally!) in some random neighborhood in the suburbs and then just go wander around. People would flip their shit. The response to this is always something like, "what do you expect, you live in the city." Yes, yes, I do, but that doesn't mean I have to turn my neighborhood into a parking lot just for you.
Free To Be Just Like Me
One thing I learned watching the glibertarian movement over the years is that there's a weird contradiction at its heart. Namely, just what is this freedom for? Libertarianism combined with a kind of status quo worship of meritocracy basically means it's people who have the cultural trappings of "success" define themselves as life models. There isn't even all that much pot smoking among the "Republicans who want to smoke pot." It's basically preaching that society should reward you even more for having the right haircut, going to the right schools, getting the right education, wearing the right clothes, and liking all the right things! And it would if not for all the blah people taking all the jobs due to the iron boot of the state's affirmative action!
Glibertarian freedom is older upper middle class white dudes being rebellious by drinking bourbon and being in a shitty dad rock band. The freedom to conform, basically.
Glibertarian freedom is older upper middle class white dudes being rebellious by drinking bourbon and being in a shitty dad rock band. The freedom to conform, basically.
Sunday, March 05, 2017
Tormented Souls
Pretty sure they all deserve it.
Trump is upset because he doesn't believe he is getting the credit he thinks he deserves for his time in office so far because of self-inflicted wounds and missteps, the source said. An informed presidential ally outside government but close to the President said Trump was really angry about having a "mini disaster" a week. The President's mood is adding to tremendous pressure inside the West Wing and aides have been seen in tears in recent days at multiple meetings.
That's Big
I mean this with no criticism intended, but it has long puzzled me how much local news "talent" can get paid. I mean, good for them, I just find it surprising.
I know someone who lives in a nearby similarly sized house and... 8,000 square feet is yuuuuuge.
This time, it's the Rittenhouse home of 6ABC "Action News" anchor Monica Malpass that showed up for sale in a Century 21 listing. Malpass has been at the station since 1988 and continues to lead 6ABC's award-winning "Inside Story" program. She's lived in the coveted Rittenhouse property, located at 2004 Delancy Street, since 2005.
For the voyeurs of the world, here's a look inside her home, which is asking $4.9 million. It has six bedrooms, five bathrooms and 8,200 square feet of space on a "quaint tree-lined block on the National Historical Registry." And if you're into basketball, the third-floor gym has a wall-mounted hoop.
I know someone who lives in a nearby similarly sized house and... 8,000 square feet is yuuuuuge.
Investigating You Investigating Me
Better put everyone in the White House on suicide watch.
I'm starting to suspect the preznit is not so bright. I guess this is the real news:
The White House showed no indication that it would back down from Mr. Trump’s claims. On Sunday, the president demanded a congressional inquiry into whether Mr. Obama had abused the power of federal law enforcement agencies before the 2016 presidential election.
I'm starting to suspect the preznit is not so bright. I guess this is the real news:
WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)