prev <-> next
[2025-02-21 20:49:08] - trump threatening a governor ~a
[2025-02-21 16:11:41] - paul: it seems like he wants to make the lives of bureaucrats fucked. (the p.2025 creator has openly admitted to this). this has some large and measurable downsides to the daily lives of americans. ~a
[2025-02-21 16:09:59] - paul: "I fully expect there will be some combo of tax cuts or spending increases which will dwarf all the money saved by DOGE so I'm not getting too optimistic" what's more i think his expense cutting method is frenetic and dangerous? (ie. changes to the doe and nuclear secrets & fissile material. ie. the changes to the faa and planes. ie. the changes to the fda and baby formula safety. ie. the changes to the epa and the environment) ~a
[2025-02-21 16:06:34] - paul: "frankly, most of them are under the executive branch" it's totally true that everything in the executive is under his purview: but he's not allowed to break the law when executing. you agree with that, right? if dogs are breaking the law (and imo it clearly is), then the courts need to ask trump politely to stop? i predict a flood of successful (and otherwise) lawsuits. breaking the law is impeachable AND lawsuit-bringable. ~a
[2025-02-21 14:26:46] - paul: according to section 2, it's "civil officers" and above, only, that can be impeached. (i doubt you have to be senate confirmed to be a civil officer) if elon is in charge of a department, he might be a civil officer? but also maybe not. since i don't know what a civil officer is i'm only guessing. (i totally get that what elon is in charge of is for debate: but i'm sure the house has standing) ~a
[2025-02-19 23:54:46] - a: I fully expect there will be some combo of tax cuts or spending increases which will dwarf all the money saved by DOGE so I'm not getting too optimistic, but it's a little nice to finally see some action being taken to try to scale things back even a bit. -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:53:47] - a: And I know that sounds weird because I'm not entirely sure how to feel about it. Is all this DOGE stuff legal and constitutional? Maybe? I think so? Is it the best way to do things? Almost certainly not. But is it the biggest push towards actually cutting government waste and bureaucracy in my lifetime? Quite possibly. -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:52:12] - a: "do you agree with them? is he being tough, but fair? is the administration focused enough on lowering prices? do you approve of his program to deport immigrants illegally in the us? should the us take over gaza?" I've been thinking a lot about this. It's really tough. Lots to dislike about what Trump has done so far, but there are some things which I think I am tentatively really excited about? -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:51:05] - a: "josh rogan works for the washington post" I misread that as "Joe Rogan works for the Washington Post" and did a double take. -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:50:00] - a: This is a big problem that I think we discussed a year or two ago after a court case ending Chevron deference. Congress has abdicated too much power to bureaucrats in agencies under the executive. -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:49:03] - a: I don't know if he's done anything this term yet which I think is impeachment worthy. Probably? It's honestly a little hard to follow everything. The whole deal with DOGE and the cuts to federal agencies is tricky because, frankly, most of them are under the executive branch so technically he probably has a lot of leeway in terms of managing them. -Paul
[2025-02-19 23:47:05] - a: "do you have any "red lines" for you and trump/musk?" I'm not sure you can impeach a private citizen but in terms of Trump sure. I think I have a lower bar for impeachment than many. I think his business with asking Ukraine to dig into Biden and also with January 6th were worthy of consideration. -Paul
[2025-02-18 20:05:35] - damnit, i guess i said all that wrong. i agree, if you are committing violence you're doing a lot more than just free speech, 100%. but, we're talking about the converse: if you're doing free speech, you may or may not be also encouraging violence? ~a
[2025-02-18 19:47:55] - mig: maybe, but not necessarily? trump didn't storm the capitol, but he definitely encouraged it, and was impeached for it. (sorry for the hitler reference, but we are discussing literal nazis: i doubt hitler did much in the way of violent acts? i skimmed his wikipedia page and couldn't find anything) ~a
[2025-02-18 19:39:07] - a: if you are committing violence you’re doing a lot more than just free speech. - mig
[2025-02-18 18:13:45] - also, it's the job of the media to report on big-evil. if nazis are using free speech to create a new-nazi movement, then media should definitely be doing everything it can to report accurately on that movement. ~a
[2025-02-18 14:25:34] - easily? you can easily use free speech to create a violent movement: you're weaponizing free speech in that case. in my opinion. it still is, and should be legal, obviously. but, free speech can be used for evil. ~a
[2025-02-17 16:28:41] - https://x.com/SKMorefield/status/1891154628445614081 let's leave aside the utter ridiculousness of the nazis "weaponizing" free speech (when there was no free speech in nazi germany). How exactly does one "weaponize" free speech in the manner this reporter is suggesting? - mig
[2025-02-17 16:26:54] - a: 1) on some things, yes, other no. 2) tough? i guess. fair, probably not. 3) the tarrif obsession makes that a clear no. 4) no, but I put a lot of that on democrats. 5) it's not happening so the point is rather moot. - mig
[2025-02-17 13:10:15] - mig: i can't talk to most of hardly any of those people, so how would i convince them of anything? do you agree with them? is he being tough, but fair? is the administration focused enough on lowering prices? do you approve of his program to deport immigrants illegally in the us? should the us take over gaza? ~a
[2025-02-16 17:39:26] - a: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/trump-approval-opinion-poll-2025-2-9/ look, me and paul aren’t the ones you need to try convincing. -mig
[2025-02-14 21:21:57] - i kinda wish there was more details to this (josh rogan works for the washington post) ~a
[2025-02-14 21:15:47] - mig: so, i assume that's a red line, if he didn't get congressional approval that would be something where you'd enthusiastically call for his impeachment? are there any others? if he withholds the legal payment congress approved, for political reasons, again? ~a
[2025-02-14 18:27:37] - putting boots on ground would certainly be an issue but we that seems very unlikely atm. - mig
[2025-02-13 15:57:46] - paul/mig: maybe i should have asked this question a few months ago, but do you have any "red lines" for you and trump/musk? where if they take one of these specific actions, you would enthusiastically call for their impeachment? nominating a 10th scotus justice? ignoring a court order? ethnic cleansing? putting boots on the ground of gaza/ukraine without congressional approval? shutting down the fbi/cia/usss? an insurrection again? ~a
[2025-02-13 15:54:25] - paul: yeah, good point. in my retirement accounts i just traded them normally. no need for the weird conversion as there is no tax implication either way. ~a
[2025-02-12 16:49:34] - a: Sounds like some day when I have some free time I should look into those conversions, then. I like lower expense ratios. My Vanguard funds are entirely in retirement accounts, so I don't think I care about taxable events even. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:47:53] - a: "but would you disagree with those numbers?" I haven't been following the latest news (it seems to have fallen off the front page). Based on what I heard your numbers seem reasonable. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:46:32] - a: Some entity needs to push back, and that's largely going to be insurance companies. You said we pay too much in America. I don't think that's because insurance is denying too many claims. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:45:20] - a: Which is why I am uncomfortable with this narrative that any increase in denied claims is some immoral atrocity. Doctors have every incentive in the world to keep increasing what they charge and prescribe all the tests because patients are largely shielded from the costs. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:43:40] - a: https://www.vox.com/policy/390031/anthem-blue-cross-blue-shield-anesthesia-limits-insurance BCBS said they weren't going to pay the doctors as much (denied claims?) and got a ton of blow-back on some attempts to control costs and so backtracked. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:42:41] - a: I think (and I have no proof of this but also have seen no evidence to the contrary) that UNH wasn't out there denying needed cancer treatments to sick kids. I'm guessing a lot of those denials were more like the fight with the anesthesiologists that happened the same time. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:39:50] - a: "i don't think it's usually up to the insurance companies whims which things will be covered" I'm not an expert in insurance, but given that (as you say) there are contracts and whatnot in place, I find it hard to believe that UNH was egregiously breaking those contracts en masse. -Paul
[2025-02-12 16:30:29] - mig: doesn't rent free imply he's not breaking his back to get where he is in everyone's minds? in the chatgpt case he had to blatantly lie to everyone about how he was going to buy up his competitor? this seems like the opposite of rent free to me. ~a
[2025-02-12 01:09:38] - I feel like elon is living rent free in everyone’s heads right now. - mig
[2025-02-11 16:44:40] - "not particularly, maybe i should, but not particularly." ~a
[2025-02-11 16:43:56] - elon musk is (not) going to buy chatgpt. those are some sweet corporate burns. ~a
[2025-02-10 14:51:22] - paul: there are also some downsides to etfs: i think the biggest one that i know of is the "conversions" i mentioned are one-way: you can't convert them back without having a taxable event. ~a
[2025-02-10 14:35:51] - paul: you can trade them in the middle of the day, not once per day (4pm). their "nav" doesn't get updated once per day: instead their price gets updated throughout the day. you don't have to use vanguard to trade them. you don't have to use vanguard to hold them. google sheets won't always be a partial-day behind. ~a
[2025-02-10 14:35:10] - paul: "Is there a significant advantage to ETFs over mutual funds?" depends on how heavily you you weight "significant"? i like them. their expense ratios are smaller! not slightly smaller either: but honestly with ratios THIS low, they are *both* low enough, imo. ~a
[2025-02-10 14:33:22] - paul: "I don't think there are ETF equivalents of some of those" there are etfs for all of those. vti, vxus, and vwo respectively. (namely these aren't just "similar funds", but actually "exactly the same funds": if you use vanguard's tool to "convert" them you won't have a taxable event? i am not a cpa) ~a
[2025-02-10 14:23:49] - paul: "Do you still think Trump is responsible for the crash?" i'm guessing a fair guess would put it 80% on the helicopter pilot, 20% on the air traffic controller, and ~0% on the airplane pilot? i'll admit i'm not fully versed on all the ins an outs of the case, but would you disagree with those numbers? ~a
[2025-02-10 14:21:44] - paul: insurance is supposed to pay for (all) of your covered expenses. i'll admit many insurances have limits and deductibles and terms and conditions, so "some" is more correct than "all", but, i don't think it's usually up to the insurance companies whims which things will be covered: which things are covered are up to detailed rules or there would be bias. ~a
[2025-02-09 05:54:13] - a: I still have a lot of VTSAX, VTIAX, and VEMAX. I don't think there are ETF equivalents of some of those? Is there a significant advantage to ETFs over mutual funds? -Paul
[2025-02-09 05:50:11] - a: "is that short for bluesky?" Yeah, I didn't know what they called tweets so I made something up. Do you still think Trump is responsible for the crash? I've seen no additional evidence to support that. -Paul
[2025-02-09 05:48:22] - a: "i think we can all agree january 6th was a bit of a false narrative" Sure, but what I'm saying is that THIS is a bit of a false narrative too. As far as I know, there is no evidence Luigi had any denied claims from UHC to provoke this murder. I'm still waiting on evidence that the changes the CEO made directly led to ANYBODY's death. -Paul
[2025-02-09 05:45:59] - a: "100% yes. if he bought homelessness insurance" Insurance is supposed to pay for (some) of your expenses. It doesn't magically prevent illness and death. Where is the evidence that these changes caused millions of people to die? -Paul
[2025-02-06 21:44:42] - paul/daniel: vanguard has a feature i just found to convert your mutual funds to etfs. (the conversion is not a taxable event, and your cost-basis information is kept intact). i just converted ~25% of my liquid savings from mutual funds to etfs for free! so, now i'm at 80% etfs, 5% mutual funds, and 15% other (the 15% other is pretty evenly: cash, btc, and individual stocks). ~a
[2025-02-04 14:51:39] - mig: "if we want to make the argument that the changes he’s made were negative" yes that's the argument i am making: the changes he has made were negative. "feels as evidence free as Trump suggesting that DEI somehow caused the crash" you don't think dei caused the crash? ~a
[2025-02-04 14:23:19] - mig
[2025-02-04 14:23:14] - This assertion that is somehow Trump’s fault when he’s been in office for *checks notes* 2 weeks, feels as evidence free as Trump suggesting that DEI somehow caused the crash. -
[2025-02-04 14:21:37] - a: doubt? Even if we want to make the argument that the changes he’s made were negative it’s not like starting a hiring binge last week would have just magically provide more ATCs at dca. - mig
[2025-02-04 14:10:09] - paul: sky? is that short for bluesky? you mean doucette? doucette implied that the many changes trump made to the faa, and changes to the air traffic controller community (hiring freeze + demand sent to the workers), and changes to the aviation safety boards, were related to the first mid-air collision in 16 years. i don't think that's an unreasonable supposition. but, i guess we'll eventually find out. ~a
[2025-02-04 14:03:04] - paul: "explaining it away based on how the attackers feel aggrieved" based on how the attackers are harmed is what matters. not how they feel aggrieved. if i feel aggrieved based on a thing that is not true, then how i feel is irrelevant: how am i actually harmed. i think we can all agree january 6th was a bit of a false narrative. ~a
[2025-02-04 13:58:23] - paul: "If I don't buy a home for a homeless person, am I causing him to be homeless?" 100% yes. if he bought homelessness insurance. and paid the premium. and when he lost his job and home, and reached his deductible, you still denied his coverage. ~a
[2025-02-04 07:38:44] - a: Even if we assume understaffed is inherently a mistake, that doesn't seem tied to the other things that sky was trying to use to blame on Trump. -Paul
[2025-02-04 07:37:12] - a: "a bit of a false equivalence?" How is it a false equivalence? Both of them are.... if not excusing violence then kind of explaining it away based on how the attackers feel aggrieved. -Paul
[2025-02-04 07:36:11] - a: "a third party helped cause millions of extra deaths and millions to suffer in pain and agony" The word 'caused' is doing a lot of work there. If I don't buy a home for a homeless person, am I causing him to be homeless? Even in your worst example UNH was still approving over 2/3rds of claims. Are they causing those people to live happy and healthy lives then? -Paul
[2025-02-04 07:32:12] - a: "do you have any justification that the us healthcare system is as good as others?" We have one of the best cancer survival rates. We're near the top in MRI machines per million. We're top (or close to it) in new drugs and medical procedures. -Paul
[2025-02-03 21:18:41] - xpovos: let's see how he does: oh, i figured he was already done. "it is biden's fault, because dei". job's done, boss. ~a
[2025-02-03 19:32:42] - a: I'm much more willing to take it to Trump's desk with a "buck stops here" mandate because he's CIC and this incident involved a military vehicle. But both options seem at least plausible. So this is Trump's problem to resolve. Let's see how he does. I'm sure it will be poorly. -- Xpovos
[2025-02-01 21:36:35] - mig: agreed. it's a longstanding problem. ~a
[2025-02-01 17:15:57] - a: https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/05/14/business/faa-short-on-air-traffic-controllers atc staffing issues are not some sort of suddenly new problem. - mig
[2025-01-31 16:50:21] - paul: (much less direct in one sense and much more direct in another sense: you also need to consider the two pilots involved. both of them are under the purview of the faa, and potentially either of them could have behaved differently: especially the helicopter pilot) ~a
[2025-01-31 15:56:57] - paul: "A single controller was handling helicopters in and around the airport and also instructing planes that were landing and departing. 'Those jobs typically are assigned to two controllers, rather than one'" (nyt) ~a
[2025-01-31 15:56:19] - paul: "Is there any evidence that somebody at the FAA made a fatal mistake?" yes, but only potentially, and only partially. there is plenty of evidence that the flight control desk was fucked at that time: "Like most of the country's air traffic control facilities, the tower at Reagan airport has been understaffed for years" (nyt), wednesday night "not normal for the time of day and volume of traffic" (faa) ~a
[2025-01-31 15:50:21] - paul: "the impact might be overstated" overstated by who? i said it would be hard to measure, so maybe even an impact that is hardly noticeable? ~a
[2025-01-31 15:48:24] - paul: "Both can be bad and should be condemned" agreed. i feel like that's what i said. ~a
[2025-01-31 15:47:45] - paul: "I'm sure those January 6th rioters thought they had no choice but to stop the steal with force" a bit of a false equivalence? ~a
[2025-01-31 15:47:14] - paul: "because a third party made it tougher to have them pay for their medical care? That seems a bit extreme" i'm not sure that's a fair depiction of what happened. a third party helped cause millions of extra deaths and millions to suffer in pain and agony. "that still seems like too close to an excuse for political violence for my liking" ok. ~a
[2025-01-31 15:44:16] - paul: do you have any justification that the us healthcare system is as good as others? i feel like i've done a great job showing our healthcare system is failing, but you don't buy it, because of confounding factors: why do you think our healthcare system is doing as well as oecd? and even if you can show me that it's "as good" (i have doubts this will be easy), you'll admit being "as good, but much much much more expensive" is bad? ~a
[2025-01-30 23:57:22] - a: Is there any evidence that somebody at the FAA made a fatal mistake? Last I heard they were warning the helicopter to watch out for the plane. Feels like we need more evidence otherwise this is just the inverse of Lisa's tiger repelling rock. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:54:26] - a: "i predict the local economy is about to get much worse for the next five or six years" It's possible. Andrew and Travis and I actually discussed this last night and I think we agreed the impact might be overstated. We'll see how effective efforts to reduce headcount are. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:51:15] - a: Our country is pretty unique given our high levels of gun violence and obesity. We also have a unique healthcare system which distorts supply and demand. We also in a lot of ways subsidize healthcare in other countries with how medicines are priced. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:50:00] - a: "why does US healthcare (which we may not agree is worse, but i think is much, much, worse) cost orders of magnitude more?" Compared to what? Part of the problem is that there really is no apples to apples comparisons we can use. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:48:44] - a: Sure, a lot (most?) of those January 6th pardons were bad. Both can be bad and should be condemned. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:45:56] - And I'm sorry, that still seems like too close to an excuse for political violence for my liking. I'm sure those January 6th rioters thought they had no choice but to stop the steal with force but I can unequivocally say that violence was wrong. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:44:39] - "two wrongs don't make a right, but some people won't see another choice." Some people won't see another choice because a third party made it tougher to have them pay for their medical care? That seems a bit extreme. -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:43:45] - "Hospital admissions for diabetes and congestive heart failure were more frequent" Maybe because we're so much fatter than other countries? -Paul
[2025-01-30 23:42:50] - a: There are some interesting metrics in that link measuring the US healthcare system (maternal mortality, for instance), but most of those don't actually measure our healthcare system as much as how healthy we are OUTSIDE of the system. -Paul
[2025-01-30 21:05:28] - if "traumatize federal employees" is on the table, and the literally stated goal, we should expect many people who are in charge of important jobs in our government to fail. and many more people will die. if biden had fired a bunch of air traffic controllers, and told air traiffic controllers they should look for a new job, and someone under faa's purview made a fatal mistake: trump would have rightly blamed biden. ~a
[2025-01-30 20:56:43] - try not to read too much into this, but, like, it seems like a small amount partial-culpability is on the table? i'm . . . trying not to be too political since 67 people are dead. ~a
[2025-01-29 14:51:17] - xpovos: i dunno. i haven't decided anything. just looked at the numbers for 2024 and 2025 and things seemed pretty dead even compared to a few off-years we had in college. ~a
[2025-01-28 21:11:58] - title: Planning on taking it down? That'll be sad. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-28 21:11:41] - a: It's already getting messy. And it will get messier. It'll be interesting. And probably terrible for a lot of people. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-28 14:58:31] - i feel like it'll maybe be hard to measure, but i predict the local economy is about to get much worse for the next five or six years. mostly due to p2025's policy to destroy the schedule f jobs? thousands of new people on unemployment looking for jobs that won't exist and these changes won't be temporary. i guess that's what we get for depending on the federal government tax money, but in our area it's not like there was an option? ~a
[2025-01-27 17:07:11] - paul: here's my question for you: why does US healthcare (which we may not agree is worse, but i think is much, much, worse) cost orders of magnitude more? ~a
[2025-01-26 17:26:44] - paul: "but are shielded from in healthcare and therefore insurance companies have to make those calls" no, that's why insurance has always had deductible. deductible is what unshields us, and it's the whole point of a deductible. leaving insurance companies to decide what care is best is blatant bias: deductibles are what remove bias. ~a
[2025-01-26 17:24:51] - paul: "those unprecedented and blanket pardons of his entire family and Fauci are pretty bad?" yes they are very bad. the pardons we saw of violent offenders only a few days later really took the cake though! "we'll take a look at everything" (first question, first 30s of video). we'll take a look at everything? how do you "look at everything"? they. were. released. already. ~a
[2025-01-26 17:17:35] - paul: "I don't think Brian Thompson started any national conversation" sure he did, we are talking about uhc profits and denials. many people will call for vigilante justice: i am not at that point. but vigilante justice and violent action are always the release valve for when corruption and injustice and inaction to *illegal acts* reach a certain threshold. two wrongs don't make a right, but some people won't see another choice. ~a
[2025-01-26 17:05:17] - paul: "What is your justification for saying this?" yes, life expectancy is one, but like, here are a whole bunch more. ~a
[2025-01-26 17:01:08] - paul: "What do you mean by auto-denials?" ai autodenials. automatically denying something that is covered, using artificial intelligence. "Treatments that aren't covered at all?" no. treatments that are covered, but denied. ~a
[2025-01-25 13:35:38] - Curious what people here are currently thinking about affirmative action and DEI (feels related, even though I know they are not necessarily the same). There seems to be a cultural shift away from DEI at least and legal shift on affirmative action. -Paul
[2025-01-25 13:06:44] - title: Is the message board dead?
-Paul[2025-01-25 13:05:57] - a: I very nearly had a really expensive back surgery (expensive for the insurance company, free for me) but ended up being fine with much cheaper physical therapy. It's not always the case that the most expensive is best or necessary. -Paul
[2025-01-25 13:02:30] - a: Is that expensive care necessary? Is it worth the extra cost over cheaper care? These are the important points that most people consider in other aspects of life but are shielded from in healthcare and therefore insurance companies have to make those calls. -Paul
[2025-01-25 13:00:37] - a: "were intentionally denying claims for this expensive care to increase profits" That in and of itself is not damning! I intentionally don't eat filet mignon every day to increase my net worth. -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:59:53] - a: Regardless of how we all feel about Trump, can we at least agree that those unprecedented and blanket pardons of his entire family and Fauci are pretty bad? And the ERA thing? -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:58:55] - a: My comment about bypassing other branches wasn't just about the link. It was about all the stuff like student loan forgiveness, declaring (by tweet!) that the constitution had been amended when it hadn't, refusing to enforce the Tik Tok ban which Congress passed... -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:56:51] - a: I don't think Brian Thompson started any national conversation. I think Luigi Mangione started a conversation about whether it's okay to celebrate the murder of a CEO (and call for others) because you disagree with how he runs his company. -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:54:40] - a: Life expectancy is a horrible measure of health care efficacy given that Americans are much more obese and prone to shooting each other than other countries. -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:53:59] - a: "care is terrible compared to oecd?" What is your justification for saying this? Life expectancy? Because by measures of healthcare involving survival rates of diseases we do pretty well compared to other countries. -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:53:02] - a: Profit margins for health insurance companies are pretty narrow (I've seen 3-6% thrown about as estimates). Compare that to profit margins of doctors offices (or compensation for doctors). -Paul
[2025-01-25 12:50:46] - a: I've had UHC and never really had any major complaints that I didn't have with others insurers. In fact, I found them largely better than Anthem. What do you mean by auto-denials? Treatments that aren't covered at all? -Paul
[2025-01-21 17:34:44] - paul: block (formerly square) changed it's ticker symbol, not sure if you saw that. ~a
[2025-01-20 07:41:35] - paul: "[the us senate] concluded that three major companies — UnitedHealthcare, Humana and CVS, which owns Aetna — were intentionally denying claims for this expensive care to increase profits." ~a
[2025-01-19 15:52:31] - paul: "bypassing the other two branches" ??? for the most part NONE of the three branches are involved with creation of amendments. (the president can't veto them and doesn't sign them into existence, congress CAN propose them / and always does / but doesn't need to, and the courts usually only do stuff after creation is done). ~a
[2025-01-19 15:52:24] - paul: pre-authorization is not the national conversation brian thompson started: it was ai assisted auto-denial (and drastic changes to denial rates). "deny defend depose" not "preauthorization". are the NEW denial rates wrong? in my lived experience, yes. ~a
[2025-01-19 15:52:18] - paul: link: if all of the other oecd countries of the world can provide better care for lower cost, wtf was brian thompson and his cohort doing to us? the auto-denials are showing up in the numbers: we are dying earlier at a higher cost? ~a
[2025-01-19 15:40:29] - paul: "You can't both criticize insurance companies for not covering [something] AND believe they are responsible for higher prices" (i changed "everything" to "something"!): yes you can. you certainly can. easily. by looking at the premiums not returned as medical care! you've completely ignored profit and ignored internal costs? why did you ignore those two things? profits are at record highs and care is terrible compared to oecd? ~a
[2025-01-19 15:17:31] - paul: "You're saying doctors want insurance companies to pay for 100% of what they want to charge and are angry when they don't?" no. doctors do not want insurance companies to pay for 100%. it's weird i'm reading your questions and i have to reply with a question: i'm sure you've bumped into auto-denials before irl, right? have you never had uhc? i've been caught up in auto-denials before and they are terrible. ~a
[2025-01-19 15:13:37] - paul: "the parking situation there feels pretty reasonable" yes i agree. that is the position of fuckcars. ~a
[2025-01-19 15:12:14] - xpovos: aaaah! it's at the top of the screen? i didn't see that at all. ~a
[2025-01-18 01:13:06] - https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/17/politics/joe-biden-equal-right-amendment/index.html When everybody is hyperventilating about authoritarian Trump and violating norms, I hope we all remember all the crazy stuff the Biden admin tried to force through while bypassing the other two branches. -Paul
[2025-01-18 01:07:53] - a: One of those scans required pre-authorization from BCBS, which I got. Was it a minor annoyance? I suppose. But I also understand why an insurance company looking to help control costs might wonder if I absolutely need to have all of those scans immediately. -Paul
[2025-01-18 01:01:17] - a: Because I had hit my out of pocket max and wasn't paying for any of it, I just went ahead and had all of those (ultimately pretty unnecessary) scans. If I had to pay for any portion of it out of pocket, I likely would've waited to see if physical therapy helped and ultimately never had them. -Paul
[2025-01-18 01:00:19] - a: I recently had a bunch of stuff done to address some back pain I was having. I ended up having an MRI, X-Ray, CT scan, and bone density scan. In the end, my problem was solved with some physical therapy and anti-inflammatories. -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:58:29] - a: Not every single medical procedure is some black and white "either you pay for cancer treatment or this person dies" situation. In fact, I would imagine most falls in some grey area. -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:57:40] - a: "Only id argue that Brian Thompson is a giant unethical asshole." I still don't quite understand how you get there. Again, can you provide any actual evidence for this? What did he do that was unethical? -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:56:13] - a: Again, health insurance companies are largely the only force in the (highly distorted and regulated) healthcare market trying to drive costs down. -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:55:12] - a: "97% of registered voters believe insurance companies bear significant responsibility for high health care prices" This is just bonkers and almost completely opposite and highlights the contradiction here. You can't both criticize insurance companies for not covering everything AND believe they are responsible for higher prices. -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:54:09] - a: And most of the quotes are coming from doctors, who are the "other side" of the health care equation. You're saying doctors want insurance companies to pay for 100% of what they want to charge and are angry when they don't? I wonder why? -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:52:53] - a: Or that Brian Thompson was somehow responsible. Your second article is interesting because it doesn't seem to be about denials, but about getting prior authorizations or seeking additional approval. -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:50:44] - a: I should probably clarify regarding my comment about denials. I'm not saying they never happen, but that I didn't see anybody making the case or reporting on how there was some rash of indefensible denials from United Healthcare... -Paul
[2025-01-18 00:49:09] - a: Re: fuckcars. Great? I mean, the parking situation there feels pretty reasonable in that I believe it's free for the first hour. We certainly have salons with worse parking situations.
-Paul[2025-01-16 20:57:12] - a: It seeked with "tap" or click, it seemed. Terrible UI, but I guess buttons are too small for phone UIs? I hate how everything is mobile-first. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-15 14:15:00] - (if you're like me and you can't listen to a podcast without a playback-speed option: here's a direct link to the mp3. like, who even does that? AND no seek bar / scrubber, wtf) ~a
[2025-01-15 14:14:44] - why do we keep widening highways if it doesn’t reduce traffic? "decades of research shows the opposite effects when highways are expanded—that travel times actually increase when more lanes are added". the stories of the dozens of cities in the *us* that are REMOVING HIGHWAYS was new to me. ~a
[2025-01-12 19:52:12] - "if we're going to be all pissed at health insurance companies for not paying for XYZ procedure, why not get pissed at the doctors for not doing it for free" seriously? that crazy argument seems to gloss over what premiums and . . . insurance policies are for, though, right? Btw, I would *never* argue all XYZ claims need to be approved btw. Only id argue that Brian Thompson is a giant unethical asshole. ~a
[2025-01-12 19:47:14] - *2023. ~a
[2025-01-12 19:46:25] - paul: "any at all?" seems like a low bar, but ok (article from 2003, I'm sure we can find way more stories after brian thompson was shot). here: another story. But like talk to any doctor or a person with a terminal disease? ~a
[2025-01-12 19:33:40] - paul: no, i think fuckcars is making the opposite point you think they are. they're saying your location is awesome. walkable, full of transit, and the people who use the space for car storage, pay the market rate. (also they correctly point out that the grocery store also has another free lot underneath). ~a
[2025-01-12 06:41:47] - a: Did you really win every stock market challenge since 2019? I thought it was a little more even than that. -Paul
[2025-01-12 06:39:16] - And if we're going to be all pissed at health insurance companies for not paying for XYZ procedure, why not get pissed at the doctors for not doing it for free? It's the same concept: I deserve this and shouldn't pay. Instead, somebody else should pay or should do it for free for me. -Paul
[2025-01-12 06:38:11] - Health insurance companies HAVE to reject some claims if you want any kind of price controls on health care. If you can show me stories from hundreds of people (or even dozens? any at all?) indicating that when he became CEO he caused the company to start rejecting some critical life saving care, then we can have that conversation. But I haven't even seen anybody claim that. -Paul
[2025-01-12 06:36:23] - For the Brian Thompson thing, I just still haven't seen any evidence he has done anything wrong, let alone wrong enough to warrant a death sentence. So what if United Health has higher rejected claims? We don't know what those claims are. It could be refusing life saving cancer treatment, or it could be not paying $600 for a regular aspirin. -Paul
[2025-01-12 06:34:54] - Sorry I was MIA for awhile (and after dropping a bunch of controversial opinions too!). I'm confused by the Fuck Cars thing. Is there something wrong with paid parking? I mean, I hate it, but I just generally try to avoid it.... unless I am spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on salons which are right by them. -Paul
[2025-01-06 19:23:53] - if you're cold, they're cold ~a
[2025-01-05 17:13:18] - yah. ~a
[2025-01-05 16:40:10] - a: Right, 5 was the biggest problem. with where I saw your initial line going. It makes the argument so incredibly messy, and in a completely needless way. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-05 04:04:02] - xpovos: wow lots to unpack there. i'm glad we largely agree on 1-5. i def feel the "that's a huge problem" part. for 4, i agree 10% is huge. . . . 10% means a lot of death (and life-changing-injury). 5. woof, terrorist attacks ("attacks" and "they"): neither of them intended on getting away with it, yeah. ~a
[2025-01-04 17:43:27] - My last read was he killed 15 and injured seveal others (a few dozen?). That's on part with most gun attacks. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-04 17:26:50] - The fifth point feels most consequential in bringing in this terrorist attack. Here it's less about "getting away with it," and more about causing maximum chaos on the lowest budget; with an understanding that this is a suicide attack--so there's no chance to get away with it. Cars are still useful for that (see point 1, they're dangerous). He likely prowled for a long while looking for the best target with the softest defenses. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-04 17:12:40] - (cont): Something else is higher importance. Usually time, a small and inconsequential amount, often. But it's other factors too, such as hubris, or an expression of low self-worth. Sometimes maybe even suicidal ideation. 5) If you want to kills omeone and get away with it, use a car. Probably true depending on your definition of "getting away with it." The consequences will be less severe, but there will still be consequences. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-04 17:10:38] - a: (cont) 4) Many people are intentionally dangerous and borderline homicidal. Definitions of "many" can do a lot of work. 10% is many, but it's also a very small percentage. I don't know the true percentage of truly dangerous drivers, but I'd stake 10% as a first guess. I'm persuadable in both directions. That's still a very large number of people and vehicles with no regard as to whether you or they die in an "accident." ...
[2025-01-04 17:08:34] - a: I largely won't disagree. 1) Motor vehicles are dangerous. true. 2) We don't treat them with much caution. As a totality, true, but I think less so than you'd argue. 3) Our punishments tend to be a slap on the wrist. Our punishments tend to be too consequentialist. Thus, the benefits reaped by safety engineering over the past 5-6 decades have gone towards--more reckless driving. That's a huge problem. -- Xpovos
[2025-01-03 05:31:30] - xpovos: i wasn't making a point. I didn't have a logical path in mind. I guess if pressed though . . . I'd probably argue that our motor vehicles are dangerous and we don't treat them with much caution. our punishments for people that disrespect them are often a slap on the wrist. many people are intentionally dangerous, and borderline homicidal. if you want to kill someone and get away with it, use a car. ~a
[2025-01-03 00:26:37] - a: I don’t know if the intentional violence by car also killing people is a great addition to your point. If you disagree, as it seems you might, I’m curious about your thoughts and your logical path. — Xpovos
[2025-01-02 19:05:56] - i found this on reddit. wtf google if google fixes it's answer, as of writing, it has the wrong answer: "No, 3/8 is not bigger than 5/16; 5/16 is actually larger than 3/8". the explanation is hilarious, because it *is* smart enough to convert both numbers to sixteenths, but still fucks up the last step. ~a
[2025-01-01 17:19:33] - 10 people killed by one car this morning ~a
[2024-12-21 22:20:42] - paul: https://coinmarketcap.com/ lol, it's gonna be a close one. ~a
[2024-12-16 22:06:48] - mig: honestly, i'm tending towards #3 or #4 because they seem the most likely. the original quote was "turns out not to be right" and that feels like the most correct language. ~a
[2024-12-16 22:04:21] - mig: #1 wouldn't work because, hegseth could have held onto his letter of acceptance. or literally told/called anyone about it at the time. or emailed anyone about it at the time. or wrote someone / wrote something down (it was the 90s). #2 this also wouldn't work for all the same reasons as in #1. you forgot #3: someone fucked up real bad. also you forgot #4: someone miscommunicated real bad. ~a
[2024-12-16 19:52:33] - I can’t think of a reason for *2* different source at West Point to make this mistake other than, 1) making the assertion about Hegseth without verifying it, or 2) knowing full well it was false but making it anyways. Both come from a place of malice. - mig
[2024-12-16 19:48:08] - a: It was only easily refuted because Hegseth held on to his letter of acceptance. Without it, he probably has to petition West Point to clear this up. Call me a cynic but I don’t think they would be as swift in clearing this up. - mig
[2024-12-16 18:46:13] - using a car for over 50% of out-of-home activities lowers life satisfaction. i've been thinking about this more and more every year. if you design a city for cars, then everybody will have to drive, which leads to congestion. ~a
[2024-12-16 16:32:03] - i'm totally not following the pros-cons that someone at west point would have been going through if they intentionally did this. ~a
[2024-12-16 16:31:33] - mig: ok. i mean, it seems like a non-trivial mistake that deserves some further investigation: but without knowing west point's motivations for lying (west point is typically loyal to the gop, i'm guessing) . . . like why would you add a huge amount of confusion to a serious issue like this? why even would west point intentionally do this? like wouldn't it make them look terrible when the (VERY easy to confirm) truth comes out? ~a
[2024-12-16 16:18:00] - a: condensed. i don’t think I have changed the spirit of what was said. - mig
[2024-12-16 13:39:32] - mig: did you intentionally change the quote? ~a
[2024-12-16 05:35:28] - https://x.com/joshgerstein/status/1867195493370962293 “should we do a story every time someone from the government lies?” in what world shouldn’t the answer be “100% yes” - mig
[2024-12-16 03:32:35] - yeah when the grocery stores are 1000 times more convenient you don't have to go twice per month. ~a
[2024-12-16 00:47:21] - with all the groceries i get in one trip i ain't hauling that shit on metro or on a bike. - mig
[2024-12-15 04:18:35] - paul: you're on fuckcars. sorta. i think you're just barely off camera. (fuckcars is criticizing/trolling the video creator here and not the area: which is very uber-walkable and dripping in public transit) ~a
[2024-12-13 19:36:55] - that reminds me. when obi wan kenobi went into hiding, why didn't he change his name? he changed his nick-name, sorta, but he still went by his name. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:14:26] - paul: i would def put both mangione and thompson in "strong negative". so same favorability i think? you aren't surprised by this for me i assume though. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:10:43] - paul: before 2022 my financial advisor said i should get rid of my tips and i totally ignored him. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:09:17] - paul: "I feel like you literally spent weeks arguing the exact opposite point with me around the election" i said inflation was average during biden's presidential term, and i still feel that way. "This is why I don't invest in TIPS" well i'm sold. i don't plan to divest from tips overnight, but i'm 100% done being fucked by them. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:06:53] - paul: "I feel like in order to be at all close to the 'justifiable murder' side". just no. this was not justifiable murder. not even gray-area, or borderline or anything resembling a grey area or borderline. what brian thompson did was bullshit, imo. and a violent response (to what some consider "violence", but i do not) is maybe warranted. but murder crosses many many lines. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:03:27] - paul: if your claim is that the new ratios are justified, the burden of proof is on you (or more seriously the burden was on brian thompson before he was murdered). ~a
[2024-12-13 18:02:42] - Except that doesn't even fully encapsulate things because she survived! -Paul
[2024-12-13 18:02:40] - paul: "But what are the ratios?" answered in my link. "How do we determine justified vs unjustified?" these are all questions answered by: "that change is stark. and drastic. abrupt, astonishing, sudden, yucky." that UHC completely changed their metrics for how claims are denied, used AI to auto-deny the claims, and over night became the company that had the highest ratio of denied claims is what you failed to address. ~a
[2024-12-13 18:02:06] - https://stratpolitics.org/2024/12/unitedhealthcare-poll/ Is this how some people feel here? Because this is a "What. The. Fuck" thing to me. It's like having a higher approval for Jared Loughner than Gabby Giffords! -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:58:06] - mig: yeah wow. looks like we're going WAY back. "it's a really murky case. - aba". now that's a name i haven't heard in a long time gif. ~a
[2024-12-13 17:37:39] - a: This is why I don't invest in TIPS. I don't really understand it and don't trust it to be able to provide a positive return or even retain value during periods with volatile inflation. -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:36:26] - a: "inflation was *terrible* in 2022, i think we can all agree" Is this tongue in cheek? Because I feel like you literally spent weeks arguing the exact opposite point with me around the election.
-Paul[2024-12-13 17:35:05] - a: I would've assumed most of these people are not (a), and I haven't seen any evidence remotely close to (b). -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:33:12] - a: I feel like in order to be at all close to the "justifiable murder" side (which it sounds like a lot of people are), you would need to be (a) pro death penalty and (b) have evidence this person directly harmed/killed many innocent people. -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:30:50] - a: I haven't seen any evidence that UHC was suddenly denying reasonable life saving care for anybody, or at a higher rate, or that any of it is tied to the CEO. Wouldn't that be... illegal in some way? -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:29:43] - a: Insurance companies can't just say yes to everybody. In the absence of a market, there has to be some push-back or else costs will spiral out of control and insurance will become unaffordably expensive. -Paul
[2024-12-13 17:28:31] - a: Which example? The denied claims one? Didn't I just completely address that? Are there unjustified denied claims? Almost certainly. But what are the ratios? How do we determine justified vs unjustified? -Paul
[2024-12-13 16:21:03] - https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/12/13/us/duke-lacrosse-accusations-crystal-mangum given how much we talked about this at the time, felt like it was worth dropping this here. - mig
[2024-12-11 22:20:46] - paul/daniel: for reference i put money in both tip and spip hoping i'd see a roi on high-inflation years and was surprised by 2022! ~a
[2024-12-11 22:08:58] - paul/daniel: usd became worth less in 2022 (-8% due to inflation), and both funds are supposed to hold flat-ish during inflation (in real terms), so shouldn't both funds go UP by about 8% instead of DOWN by 17%??? the fact that both unrelated funds parroted each-other (17% down) means it wasn't just random noise, i assume? ~a
[2024-12-11 22:06:24] - paul/daniel: finance question about tips (treasury inflation-protected securities). two real-world examples are tip (ishares tips bond etf) and spip (spdr portfolio tips etf). inflation was *terrible* in 2022, i think we can all agree. both funds dropped in 2022 by similar amounts. apx -17% in both funds. shouldn't the opposite happen? ~a
[2024-12-11 15:38:51] - "not" the onion? not, not the onion ~a
[2024-12-11 01:27:41] - paul: "A denied claim isn't necessarily unjustified or directly leading to death or injury" are you ignoring the denied claims that are unjustified? ~a
[2024-12-11 01:15:07] - paul: "Can anybody point to actual evil stuff this guy has actively done?" how about my example? it feels cut and dry to me. again, def wouldn't gun him down for it. but pretty evil, or at the least super evil-adjacent. ~a
[2024-12-11 01:14:48] - mig: troll? you're saying the president is trolling both republicans and democrats? if you look at the replies (yes, this requires you to create an account), the republicans replying are NOT seeing this as a troll. they're ALL 100% like "waaait, didn't democrats want to do the opposite in 2016?" ~a
[2024-12-10 23:26:49] - a: I’d just file it under troll and move on. I *kind* of get it but eh. - mig
[2024-12-10 22:29:55] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB_OApdxcno&t=12 a 10 minute video I think you'll like about partisanship and how people ignore facts they don't like (ignore the first 12 seconds: he starts with clickbate bullshit). ~a
[2024-12-10 20:16:20] - But even putting all of that aside... he was a father and husband... I just don't really get celebrating that and encouraging more murders of similar people. -Paul
[2024-12-10 20:15:34] - Can anybody point to actual evil stuff this guy has actively done? Is he worse than Presidents who have actively ordered drone strikes that kill masses of innocent people? -Paul
[2024-12-10 20:08:22] - I'm obviously no insurance expert, but stuff I'm hearing about this anesthesiologist / insurance conflict from people I trust seems to indicate that maybe the insurance companies were justified here and this is a cash grab by the anesthesiologists. -Paul
[2024-12-10 20:07:15] - But unless you want a system where insurance costs millions of dollars, they HAVE to deny some claims. A denied claim isn't necessarily unjustified or directly leading to death or injury. -Paul
[2024-12-10 20:05:11] - I know there's some legal issues that he was embroiled in and maybe something will come of that, but most people don't seem to be leaning on that as much as: "He's a health insurance CEO who denies claims and thus is evil" -Paul
[2024-12-10 20:04:19] - Unpopular opinion: I'm a little uncomfortable by this seeming assumption by a disturbingly large number of people that the murder of Brian Thompson isn't a tragedy or is even celebration worthy because he is evil. -Paul
[2024-12-10 17:02:26] - https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/113621278691359489 I don't get it. ~a
[2024-12-09 19:30:43] - mig: i'm not entirely sure how yucky it would have to get before i'd murder anybody in cold blood. pretty yucky i'd imagine. even if i knew the circumstance of who in his family died due to a uhc denial, i still feel strongly that murder of the uhc ceo is wrong. like, i totally get that changing companies is sometimes impossible, but you aren't ever forced to be a uhc customer. people 100% do change companies due to health insurance. ~a
[2024-12-09 19:24:46] - mig: nope. ~a
[2024-12-09 18:30:52] - paul: I’m not sure anything separates these people from the magas anymore. “murder of people I don’t like is ok” strikes me as pretty fascist. - mig
[2024-12-09 18:26:45] - a: i mean sure it’s yucky. is it “murder him in cold blood” yucky? - mig
[2024-12-09 18:18:31] - "uhc began using artificial intelligence to automate claim denials" ~a
[2024-12-09 18:16:20] - "the investigation revealed that in 2019, uhc's prior authorization denial rate was 8%. [brian thompson] became ceo in 2021, and by 2022 the rate of denial had increased to 23%. ... uhc declines claims at a rate which is double the industry average" that change is stark. and drastic. abrupt, astonishing, sudden, yucky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Claim_denial_rates_by_insurance_company.webp ~a
[2024-12-09 04:59:27] - mig: Among other people, yes. -Paul
[2024-12-07 06:27:53] - paul: are you talking about hunter debutts? - mig
[2024-12-07 01:49:41] - Also, it's kind of crazy how many people (and not just random internet weirdos but actual journalists and professors and whatnot) are openly celebrating that a human being was gunned down in cold blood. -Paul
[2024-12-07 01:44:54] - Disinformation on social media is a problem? Let's start spreading made up stories about past pardons that never happened! -Paul
[2024-12-07 01:42:58] - The Trump family's corruption is uniquely dangerous? Hunter says "hold my cocaine". The President isn't above the law? Biden pardons Hunter for any crimes he might have committed during a time it could be linked to Joe. -Paul
[2024-12-07 01:40:59] - https://reason.com/2024/12/05/hunter-bidens-pardon-is-unprecedented/ Man, this story is like a perfect storm of hypocrisy for the left. Trump is horrible for his blatant lies? Hard to get more blatant than Biden's... -Paul
[2024-12-05 13:02:30] - https://x.com/AnthonyAdragna/status/1864011018839486540 showing utter contempt for the people whose votes you'll need in upcoming elections seems like a bold strategy. - mig
[2024-12-04 15:17:17] - a: "a bit of an understatement?" I was trying to paint the best picture. While I had a low opinion of Biden going into the 2020 election, I could understand how the bright side could view him as the VP to a popular President with a TON of experience and an "everyman" vibe. -Paul
[2024-12-03 16:51:32] - paul: “ Democrats need to give them something to vote FOR.” I think that’s probably the #1 thing that should be the takeaway. Voters have no obligation to vote for you, and acting like you are entitled to people’s votes because “other man bad” isn’t a winning strategy. - mig
[2024-12-03 15:13:12] - paul: "Heck, I don't even think Biden was a great attempt" a bit of an understatement? ~a
[2024-12-03 14:33:27] - https://x.com/compound248/status/1863782583722496205 Actually, I found one that sounds reasonable (it's from X, so of course take everything with a grain of salt). -Paul
[2024-12-03 03:58:47] - Slight topic change, but can anybody give me a good reason why this Delaware judge keeps overruling the will of the majority of Tesla shareholders (voted on twice!) in favor of a plaintiff who apparently owns 9 shares? -Paul
[2024-12-03 03:57:46] - a: And I think they failed miserably with Kamala. Heck, I don't even think Biden was a great attempt. I just think people were more tired of Trump at that point. -Paul
[2024-12-03 03:56:45] - a: I think I said he has dictatorial tendencies. Either way, this is somewhat beyond my original point. I was saying that just trying to paint him as racist / sexist / fascist isn't apparently enough for voters. Democrats need to give them something to vote FOR. -Paul
[2024-12-03 03:55:25] - a: "don't officially have a party" And Supreme Court Justices don't officially have a party either, but that doesn't stop everybody from always referring to them as being on sides. -Paul
[2024-12-03 01:52:44] - yeah. ~a
[2024-12-02 18:18:56] - <a href=“ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna182369”> "I said I'd abide by the jury decision, and I will do that. And I will not pardon him.”</a> - mig
[2024-12-01 18:21:08] - paul: "it was the Democrats who were trying to jail him" the new york grand jury, and the new york jury, and the judge, don't officially have a party. "helpful hypothetical" that's a fun phrase. "I don't think he WILL be a dictator" it was your scenario: you said he was dictatorial instead of fascist-ish? i think a dictator/autocrat that is violent is usually called a "fascist". ~a
[2024-12-01 15:42:31] - a: "i asked you first" I tend to be pendantic to a fault so I would argue it's not. I think he's bullying, and an ass, and has plenty of faults, but I'm not actually convinced he thinks women are inferior. Wasn't Ivanka one of his most trusted advisors the first time around? -Paul
[2024-12-01 15:40:39] - a: I can't tell if you're kidding with the mpoundment control act of 1974 talk. I did not at all say he didn't abuse executive power. I was saying I don't think he did it any more than Biden or Obama. -Paul
[2024-12-01 15:38:40] - a: I mean, I'm sure he would abuse his power in all sorts of ways, but I also don't think we're going to be seeing Democrats marched off to concentration camps. -Paul
[2024-12-01 15:37:55] - a: "do you seriously believe he'd be a benevolent dictator?" Not sure it's a helpful hypothetical since I don't think he WILL be a dictator, but I guess if he was to become one he would be somewhere in between? -Paul
[2024-12-01 15:36:47] - a: "it's about jailing and/or physically assaulting his detractors" I must have missed where he did that? I thought it was the Democrats who were trying to jail him. -Paul
[2024-12-01 10:51:02] - "he wouldn't be the first president seeking to run around Congress power of the purse, and he won't be the last". ~a
[2024-11-29 15:32:37] - mig: "That doesn't mean we have to just sit and be OK with Trump's second term" this does seem to be the feeling i get from most of the things you say. we aren't backsliding into a dictatorship when he tries to silence the press? i think i once heard you say "I believe very little of what people are fearing will actually happen" ~a
[2024-11-29 15:29:53] - does anybody here consider the view to be a serious show? i do not. there was a time before i got rid of cable that i did watch the view. but i was mostly hate-watching it along with the o'riley factor and hannity's show. ~a
[2024-11-29 15:27:24] - All this fears about some resurfacing of the third reich or whatever is just insane. We can just look at the actual dictatorships that exist today (Iran, DPRK, China, Venezuela, etc) and the US at its worst won't even be in the same ballpark as any of those places. That doesn't mean we have to just sit and be OK with Trump's second term, but people need to keep some fucking perspective. - mig
[2024-11-29 15:22:28] - I am concerned about immigration, but people have seriously forgotten how fucking awful Obama was on this his first term. - mig
[2024-11-29 15:21:45] - as for the impoundment act, he wouldn't be the first president seeking to run around Congress power of the purse, and he won't be the last. - mig
prev <-> next