Is There ANYTHING The Left Isn’t Messing With?

[Ingomike]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. Neither side has put up candidates for president that I could vote for in the last 4 elections.

It is not about who you want to vote for, it is about who is running and what they will do…

 

[thunderchicken]

It is not about who you want to vote for, it is about who is running and what they will do…

That's true. But, are we really to believe that those who have been on the ballots are the Best suited for the job? Are those who have been on the ballots really the best LEADERS of each political party?
For many years (since I've been able to vote, 25yrs) I haven't gotten any real warm fuzzy feeling about anyone on the ballots being true leaders or national problem solvers. Just two options that come down to who do you think you can tolerate more.

 

[cg21]

What was accomplished by eliminating the gasoline can vent ?

Grooming. Frustration while filling your lawn mower builds the case for the electric mower.

 

[Onebad06vtx]

Well because of Bidenlesters policies,McDonalds egg mcmuffins are even smaller but cost more.
We have to vote the scum out of office or we are screwed!
What have they not messed up?

 

[edporch]

This slide started probably about the time of the first progressives back in the early 1900’s.

I remember a Political Science course I took at IU Bloomington back in the mid 1970's.

The prof taught that historically there are two Americas.
- First, America the republic
- Second, America the nation state, that started around Woodrow Wilson (if memory serves), .

He taught of the huge growth of the bureaucracy off the Executive branch.

 

[spencer rifle]

That's true. But, are we really to believe that those who have been on the ballots are the Best suited for the job? Are those who have been on the ballots really the best LEADERS of each political party?
For many years (since I've been able to vote, 25yrs) I haven't gotten any real warm fuzzy feeling about anyone on the ballots being true leaders or national problem solvers. Just two options that come down to who do you think you can tolerate more.

"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank Herbert

"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it and then only under conditions that increase the reluctance." - Frank Herbert

"Those in power need checks and restraints lest they come to identify the common good for their own tastes and desires, and their continuation in office as essential
to the preservation of the nation." — U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, 1956

 

[BugI02]

"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted." - Frank Herbert

"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it and then only under conditions that increase the reluctance." - Frank Herbert

"Those in power need checks and restraints lest they come to identify the common good for their own tastes and desires, and their continuation in office as essential
to the preservation of the nation." — U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, 1956

Herbert has a caution for conservatives, also:

“When religion and politics travel in the same cart, the riders believe nothing can stand in their way. Their movements become headlong - faster and faster and faster. They put aside all thoughts of obstacles and forget the precipice does not show itself to the man in a blind rush until it's too late.” ― Frank Herbert, Dune

 

[spencer rifle]

"I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or if they try, they will shortly be out of office." – Milton Friedman

 

[two70]

As I see it both sides have serious deficiencies.

True, the far left tries to adjust things to a massively woke position. Hypersensitivity to EVERYTHING! Transsexuals, gays, police abuse, treatment of immigrants. They try to stick their noses into everything and blow it up well beyond its deserved importance.

But the right does NOTHING! There isn't a real problem the right tries to fix with any meaningful nuance. High crime? Answer = lock em up - forever. Forget trying to learn the causes, just go for a solution that hasn't worked in a thousand years. But it makes them feel like they've done something.

The right has overturned Roe. Great. So what do you do about unwanted pregnancy? Uh... Don't have sex? Nope. That solution hasn't worked in... well... ever. So what is the rights solution? There isn't one. Now that Roe is gone they are only beginning to look deeper at an extremely varied and nuanced problem.

A river is polluted, severely. The left wants to shut down ALL industry. The right ignores the problem in the name of industry.

Obamacare was the best example of this ever. Prices were, and still are, insane. No one can afford to fix a simple broken bone and do a monthes PT on their own. Only a very small percentage could even consider paying their own way. So what happens? The right ignores the problem entirely. This leaves the door wide open for Obama to come in and do stupid crap that doesn't help.

Trump pushed a border wall. Okay. Fine. The liberals scream. But the wall does not address the need for legal immigration reform. What does the right propose to streamline the process for a decent, hardworking, industrious person to become a citizen? Answer = not a damn thing. Just build a wall and we'll be happy. Has the right considered how much it will cost to man the wall? Because a wall without guards is nothing more than a very minor speedbump. Answer = uh...

So the left is triggered by the wall the and right giggles at their frustration, but neither side does squat about the issue of real immigration reform so that desirable people can become American citizens in less than a decade.

I don't know what the answer is. I do know that the answer to any real problem is extremely complex and no matter what we decide it won't fix 100% of the problem. It never does. Real problems are complex, and thus cannot be solved with simple answers. This requires both sides to sit down, discuss, argue, walk away, think, and come back tomorrow to begin again. Sadly, neither side is willing to do this. So the problems remain and the frustration grows, on each side.

Regards,

Doug

IMO, wat you claim is the Right's failure, is a failure in your own expectations. It is not the Right's job in particular or the Government's job in general to "fix things". Attempts by Government to fix things invariably lead only to different and often worse problems. The best thing Government can do is nothing, barring that, the next best thing they can do is undo past mistakes (ie. Roe).

You're absolutely correct that problems are often complicated, far too complicated for Government to fix. Even if the politicians didn't serve more than one master and none more so than themselves, expecting them to solve problems that they have knowledge of and no stake in is not a sound idea. Worse, many of them do have a stake in "solving the problem" which is often far worse. It's a rare problem that personal responsibility won't solve though and relying on one's self to solve your own problems is likely to be far more effective and far less damaging than expecting Government to do so. Expecting Government to be omnipotent enough to give you everything you want and benevolent enough to give you nothing you don't is foolhardy at best.

 

[Epicenity]

As I see it both sides have serious deficiencies.



Doug

The right keeps up the drug war. Probably the most efficient mechanism ever devised for transforming the constitution into toilet paper.

 

[Libertarian01]

IMO, wat you claim is the Right's failure, is a failure in your own expectations. It is not the Right's job in particular or the Government's job in general to "fix things". Attempts by Government to fix things invariably lead only to different and often worse problems. The best thing Government can do is nothing, barring that, the next best thing they can do is undo past mistakes (ie. Roe).

You're absolutely correct that problems are often complicated, far too complicated for Government to fix. Even if the politicians didn't serve more than one master and none more so than themselves, expecting them to solve problems that they have knowledge of and no stake in is not a sound idea. Worse, many of them do have a stake in "solving the problem" which is often far worse. It's a rare problem that personal responsibility won't solve though and relying on one's self to solve your own problems is likely to be far more effective and far less damaging than expecting Government to do so. Expecting Government to be omnipotent enough to give you everything you want and benevolent enough to give you nothing you don't is foolhardy at best.

I agree that it is not the governments responsibility to fix 100% of our problems, but it sure isn't 0% either.

There is NO amount of personal responsibility that can reduce the insane cost of the health care industry. I'm not talking about doctors pay or nurses pay, but the top heavy administrative weight combined with massive overbilling for care. Break a leg, go to the hospital, set the bone, then go through three (3) monthes of therapy. 99% of the American population could not afford to pay for one (1) relatively simple fix. Now let's discuss cancer or traumatic care from an auto accident... Example: Some years ago I was shot in the hand. Finger bone replaced. Three (3) surgeries, 1st to clean the wound and care, 2nd to cut bone out of hip and replace in finger, 3rd to remove scar tissue. Total cost of the surgeries alone would have been about $50,000 - $60,000. Add to that weeks of therapy. I asked about paying for therapy myself. I was told the rate would have been $650 / hour IIRC. So therapy would have been another $10 - $15k.

Now, the government shouldn't dictate fees. But the government could force health care providers to publish ALL of their fees online and allow a patient to "shop around" in non-emergency situations. In effect, the government could force, to the extent possible, the free market onto the health care system. But it didn't. So now we have Obamacare with ALL of the funding tools removed.

To follow up on Epicenity above, the government could end the war on drugs, an exercise that has been a massive failure since, well, prohibition. The right could champion reducing government laws and interference with private use of drugs while keeping laws on the books about driving under the influence. But it doesn't.

Try to sue somebody for, well, any good reason. Or bad. It doesn't matter. Ask the lawyers how long it will take to actually go to a jury trial. (The lawyers are probably cringing at the thought of actually going to jury.) It will probably take well over a year. I don't know how long for criminal trial. Simple government answer to solve a problem: hire tenfold more judges and court staff. But it doesn't. And as Martin Luther King Jr said, "Justice delayed is justice denied." I know a man who was mad as hell that he had to settle with a home health care company that allowed a known drug addict to care for his disabled son, stealing his sons meds and causing his death. Why did he settle? Because that case had already drug out for almost two (2) DECADES and he wanted it to end before he himself died of olde age. There is no amount of "personal responsibility" he could bring to bear on a court system that is overburdened and understaffed.

What about immigration? The government could reform the process to become a legal American citizen instead of it taking decades. The average stay at Ellis Island was three (3) days. Then they were sworn in. Maybe it shouldn't be that short but it shouldn't take years either. How about turning away asylum seekers that don't qualify? Let's hire more judges and staff to reduce the wait time and burden on the system.

All of these problems exist today. And today the right isn't doing for any of them. It isn't even talking about them. This then leaves the left to come in and push really stupid crap that won't do anything.

Again, I agree that government isn't there to solve all the problems. How about we start with it fixing the problem IT creates?

Regards,

Doug

 

[two70]

I agree that it is not the governments responsibility to fix 100% of our problems, but it sure isn't 0% either.

There is NO amount of personal responsibility that can reduce the insane cost of the health care industry. I'm not talking about doctors pay or nurses pay, but the top heavy administrative weight combined with massive overbilling for care. Break a leg, go to the hospital, set the bone, then go through three (3) monthes of therapy. 99% of the American population could not afford to pay for one (1) relatively simple fix. Now let's discuss cancer or traumatic care from an auto accident... Example: Some years ago I was shot in the hand. Finger bone replaced. Three (3) surgeries, 1st to clean the wound and care, 2nd to cut bone out of hip and replace in finger, 3rd to remove scar tissue. Total cost of the surgeries alone would have been about $50,000 - $60,000. Add to that weeks of therapy. I asked about paying for therapy myself. I was told the rate would have been $650 / hour IIRC. So therapy would have been another $10 - $15k.

Now, the government shouldn't dictate fees. But the government could force health care providers to publish ALL of their fees online and allow a patient to "shop around" in non-emergency situations. In effect, the government could force, to the extent possible, the free market onto the health care system. But it didn't. So now we have Obamacare with ALL of the funding tools removed.

To follow up on Epicenity above, the government could end the war on drugs, an exercise that has been a massive failure since, well, prohibition. The right could champion reducing government laws and interference with private use of drugs while keeping laws on the books about driving under the influence. But it doesn't.

Try to sue somebody for, well, any good reason. Or bad. It doesn't matter. Ask the lawyers how long it will take to actually go to a jury trial. (The lawyers are probably cringing at the thought of actually going to jury.) It will probably take well over a year. I don't know how long for criminal trial. Simple government answer to solve a problem: hire tenfold more judges and court staff. But it doesn't. And as Martin Luther King Jr said, "Justice delayed is justice denied." I know a man who was mad as hell that he had to settle with a home health care company that allowed a known drug addict to care for his disabled son, stealing his sons meds and causing his death. Why did he settle? Because that case had already drug out for almost two (2) DECADES and he wanted it to end before he himself died of olde age. There is no amount of "personal responsibility" he could bring to bear on a court system that is overburdened and understaffed.

What about immigration? The government could reform the process to become a legal American citizen instead of it taking decades. The average stay at Ellis Island was three (3) days. Then they were sworn in. Maybe it shouldn't be that short but it shouldn't take years either. How about turning away asylum seekers that don't qualify? Let's hire more judges and staff to reduce the wait time and burden on the system.

All of these problems exist today. And today the right isn't doing for any of them. It isn't even talking about them. This then leaves the left to come in and push really stupid crap that won't do anything.

Again, I agree that government isn't there to solve all the problems. How about we start with it fixing the problem IT creates?

Regards,

Doug

Sure there are things within the Government purview, but almost none of the ones you mention should not nor were ever intended to be.

Government involvement caused most if not all of the problems with our healthcare system and you want more Government involvement? The best thing we can demand from Government is to undo the laws that created this mess. That is the personal responsibility choice. Not to continue to demand that the Government make things worse in the futile hope that the next round of meddling with benefit them. The end result of the constant demand that Government do something about healthcare, is eventually going to be Government control of healthcare. We already took a big step in that direction with Obama Care.

Or instead of the Government being involved in "forcing" anything, the patient could take the initiative to shop around on their own. It'd be almost like the individual was taking responsibility for their own care instead of depending on the benevolence of the Government. Instead, we now have the Government forcing healthcare providers to provide care for deadbeats that have no ability or willingness to pay and who abuse the system over and over which we all get to pay for, whether by taxes or the higher healthcare costs that get passed on to us.

And here we get to the crux of it, the Right is bad because they prevent people from escaping into drugs without legal repercussions. Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated. Personally, I'd be fine removing a lot of the laws against drugs provided sufficient measures are put in place to prevent users from abusing the system, but that's is extremely unlikely to happen. Elevating the issue of legalized drug use to the status of other, serious issues is itself highly indicative. That something so trivial could subsume far more important issues is depressing, that the far more important issues are merely used as trappings to support the legalization of drug use is even more so.

The system is the way it is because the Government, made up primarily of lawyers, wants it to be that way. Do you really expect that the lawyers in Government are going to create laws resulting in the reduction of billable hours?

What about immigration? Of all issues to attack the Right on this is among the silliest. Of the political parties, the Right is the only one trying to enforce immigration laws and ensure our system works. The Left has amply demonstrated that they want a flood of illegal immigrants for the benefit of their political power. The Libertarians are little, if at all, better on the issue. Yet, it is the Right upon which you direct your ire. What exactly do you want them to do, capitulate to the Left? That seems to be about the only alternative to what they are already doing. Or do you even want our border laws enforced? Maybe I'm reading your comments wrong, but it almost seems that you want restrictions on immigration removed, not enforced. Certainly, you have clearly conflated legal and illegal immigration since the problem is not with those that attempt to come here legally and follow the process but with those that don't even bother to try, who just hop across the border. If you do want immigration enforced then perhaps holding the Left and Libertarians accountable would be far more helpful than bashing the Right.

Good, the Right shouldn't be doing s***, attempting to do so almost always makes things worse. Attacking the Right or much worse pushing them to do something, only serves to give the Left more opportunity to push their seemingly crazy ideas and gain more control. That is exactly how we've gotten here.

Expecting the Government to fix the problems it creates by enacting more laws is beyond foolhardy, Government is far better at creating problems than solving them. There is little profit in solving problems as that reduces dependency.

 

[Epicenity]

Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated.

Where in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is the right to drink Pepsi enumerated?

 

[Ingomike]

Or instead of the Government being involved in "forcing" anything, the patient could take the initiative to shop around on their own. It'd be almost like the individual was taking responsibility for their own care instead of depending on the benevolence of the Government.

Not even possible to do in most cases because the payment schemes today are so convoluted. If you have some theoretical idea that the system is going to change to a cash on the barrelhead, you are delusional. And no one has the cash to afford modern medicine anyway without insurance.

 

[Ingomike]

Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated.

That is not how the constitution works. When our predecessors wanted to make alcohol illegal they, rightfully so, amended the constitution.

 

[Ingomike]

And here we get to the crux of it, the Right is bad because they prevent people from escaping into drugs without legal repercussions. Show me in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights where the right to do drugs is enumerated. Personally, I'd be fine removing a lot of the laws against drugs provided sufficient measures are put in place to prevent users from abusing the system, but that's is extremely unlikely to happen. Elevating the issue of legalized drug use to the status of other, serious issues is itself highly indicative. That something so trivial could subsume far more important issues is depressing, that the far more important issues are merely used as trappings to support the legalization of drug use is even more so.

The reason many drugs are not “legal”, particularly in Indiana, is big pharma, not the right…

 

[two70]

Not even possible to do in most cases because the payment schemes today are so convoluted. If you have some theoretical idea that the system is going to change to a cash on the barrelhead, you are delusional. And no one has the cash to afford modern medicine anyway without insurance.

Sure there is, I know several people that always shop around before a potential medical procedure. it just requires effort. The system has already begun to make that change, a lot of providers, especially in mental health, either no longer bill insurance or only partially bill insurance.

 

[two70]

That is not how the constitution works. When our predecessors wanted to make alcohol illegal they, rightfully so, amended the constitution.

Using the Amendment process to ban the people as opposed to the Federal Government from doing something was a horrible abuse of the process. And I thought the other drug related comments were silly...

 

[Ingomike]

Sure there is, I know several people that always shop around before a potential medical procedure. it just requires effort. The system has already begun to make that change, a lot of providers, especially in mental health, either no longer bill insurance or only partially bill insurance.

No, it is not in any significant way. I have personally dealt with this issue for years. Sure, one can use the cheaper MRI places, get prices on routine treatments, but for the most part, most folks do not know what is wrong until they get there, then their doctor prescribes the care needed.

The first big change that needs to occur is to stop employers from writing off the cost of employees medical care, give the deduction to the employees to buy what insurance they want, then patients will be the actual purchaser, will care more about what is covered, and what procedures cost.

I think Trump got a bill passed that required medical providers post prices but most are just doing a crazy MSRP type price.

 

[Leadeye]

DC delenda est!