Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Playinghardball

Playinghardball's Journal
Playinghardball's Journal
February 16, 2016

Way to go Bernie!!!!





February 16, 2016

WOW!!



My kind of person...
February 15, 2016

ROBERT REICH | Why Democrats must keep trying

Instead of "Yes we can," many Democrats have adopted a new slogan this election year: "We shouldn't even try."

We shouldn't try for a single-payer health care system, they say. We'll be lucky if we prevent Republicans from repealing Obamacare.

We shouldn't try for a $15-an-hour minimum wage. The best we can do is $12 an hour.

We shouldn't try to restore the Glass-Steagall Act that used to separate investment and commercial banking, or bust up the biggest banks. We'll be lucky to stop Republicans from repealing Dodd-Frank.

We shouldn't try for free public higher education. As it is, Republicans are out to cut all federal education spending.

We shouldn't try to tax carbon or speculative trades on Wall Street, or raise taxes on the wealthy. We'll be fortunate to just maintain the taxes already in place.

Most of all, we shouldn't even try to get big money out of politics. We'll be lucky to round up enough wealthy people to back Democratic candidates.

These "we shouldn't even try" Democrats think it's foolish to aim for fundamental change — pie-in-the-sky, impractical, silly, naive, quixotic. Not in the cards. No way we can.

I understand their defeatism. After eight years of Republican intransigence and six years of congressional gridlock, many Democrats are desperate just to hold on to what we have.

And ever since the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision opened the political floodgates to big corporations, Wall Street and right-wing billionaires, many Democrats have concluded that bold ideas are unachievable.

In addition, some establishment Democrats — Washington lobbyists, editorial writers, inside-the-Beltway operatives, party leaders and big contributors — have grown comfortable with the way things are. They'd rather not rock the boat they're safely in.

I get it, but here's the problem: There's no way to reform the system without rocking the boat. There's no way to get to where America should be without aiming high.

Progressive change has never happened without bold ideas championed by bold idealists.

Some thought it was quixotic to try for civil rights and voting rights. Some viewed it as naive to think we could end the Vietnam War. Some said it was unrealistic to push for the Environmental Protection Act.

But time and again we've learned that important public goals can be achieved — if the public is mobilized behind them. And time and again such mobilization has depended on the energies and enthusiasm of young people combined with the determination and tenacity of the rest.

If we don't aim high, we have no chance of hitting the target, and no hope of mobilizing that enthusiasm and determination.

The situation we're in now demands such mobilization. Wealth and income are more concentrated at the top than they have been in over a century. And that wealth has translated into political power.

The result is an economy rigged in favor of those at the top — which further compounds wealth and power at the top, in a vicious cycle that will only get worse unless reversed.

Americans pay more for pharmaceuticals than the citizens of any other advanced nation, for example. We also pay more for Internet service. And far more for health care.

We pay high prices for airline tickets even though fuel costs have tumbled. And high prices for food even though crop prices have declined.

That's because giant companies have accumulated vast market power. Yet the nation's antitrust laws are barely enforced.

Meanwhile, the biggest Wall Street banks have more of the nation's banking assets than they did in 2008, when they were judged too big to fail.

Hedge-fund partners get tax loopholes, oil companies get tax subsidies, and big agriculture gets paid off.

Bankruptcy laws protect the fortunes of billionaires such as Donald Trump but not the homes of underwater homeowners or the savings of graduates burdened with student loans.

A low minimum wage enhances the profits of big-box retailers like Walmart but requires the rest of us to provide its employees and their families with food stamps and Medicaid in order to avoid poverty — an indirect subsidy for Walmart.

Trade treaties protect the assets and intellectual property of big corporations but not the jobs and wages of ordinary workers.

At the same time, countervailing power is disappearing. Labor union membership has plummeted from a third of all private-sector workers in the 1950s to fewer than 7 percent today. Small banks have been absorbed into global financial behemoths. Small retailers don't stand a chance against Walmart and Amazon.

And the pay of top corporate executives continues to skyrocket, even as most people's real wages drop and their job security vanishes.

This system is not sustainable.

We must get big money out of our democracy, end crony capitalism, and make our economy and democracy work for the many, not just the few.

But change on this scale requires political mobilization.

It won't be easy. It has never been easy. As before, it will require the energies and commitments of large numbers of Americans. Which is why you shouldn't listen to the "we must no try" brigade. They don't have faith in the rest of us.

We must try. We have no choice.

http://www.kitsapsun.com/opinion/robert-reich--why-democrats-must-keep-trying-2b5c8862-1456-5974-e053-0100007ffc6e-368783051.html

February 15, 2016

G.O.P. Warns Obama Against Doing Anything for Next Three Hundred and Forty Days

By Andy Borowitz

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a television appearance on Sunday, the leading Senate Republican warned President Obama “in no uncertain terms” against doing anything in his remaining three hundred and forty days in office.

“The President should be aware that, for all intents and purposes, his term in office is already over,” Mitch McConnell said on Fox News. “It’s not the time to start doing things when you have a mere eight thousand one hundred and sixty hours left.”

While acknowledging that the President has eleven months remaining in the White House, McConnell said that he and the President “have an honest disagreement about how long eleven months is.”

“The President believes it is almost one year,” he said. “I believe it is almost zero years. I’m not a mathematician, but I believe I am right.”

As for how Obama should spend his remaining time in office, McConnell said, “If the President has trouble doing nothing, we will be more than happy to show him how it is done.”

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/g-o-p-warns-obama-against-doing-anything-for-next-three-hundred-and-forty-days


February 15, 2016

Will Americans Get "Berned" by Sanders' Tax Plan?

Sanders' plans tax increases on the wealthy to cover costs for Medicare for all.

Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders plans to pay for far-reaching programs, such as Medicare for all, with savings achieved by reducing waste, fraud, and bureaucracy, but the lion's share of the cost will be borne by wealthy and high-income Americans. Can Sanders promise of healthcare for all overcome pushback from taxpayers? Read on to learn more about Sanders' tax plan and what it may mean for you.

First, a bit of background
Sanders' most expensive proposal is to replace the Affordable Care Act with an expanded version of Medicare, the healthcare safety net provided to American seniors.

Sanders is quick to applaud Obamacare's reducing of the uninsured rate in the U.S. by 17 million Americans, but he's also quick to point out that Obamacare hasn't curbed healthcare costs and that coverage provided by Obamacare plans often falls short, particularly when it comes to paying for oral health, vision, and long-term care.

Specifically, Sanders thinks that rising healthcare plan deductibles and co-pays are putting too much financial pressure on low- and moderate-income Americans, and he may be right.

In 2016, the average combined prescription and healthcare services deductible for a bronze-level plan is $5,765, up 8% from $5.328 last year, and 47% of bronze metal plans have combined deductibles that are above $6,000, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.

That's a lot of money to pay before insurance really kicks in.

Additionally, Americans also pay a growing share of the cost of prescription drug medicine. Runaway price increases for prescription drugs have insurers increasingly using drug formularies with varying patient cost-sharing tiers. These formularies often place high-cost medicine in tiers requiring the biggest patient co-pays and coinsurance. As a result, formularies can lead to life-threatening choices, including the delay of treatment. Despite Obamacare's promise, 31% of Americans still report they're putting off getting medical because of its cost, according to Gallup.

Because of these shortcomings, Sanders advocates replacing private health insurance altogether with an expanded Medicare that covers everyone, soup to nuts.

However, free healthcare for all won't come cheap. U.S. spending on healthcare eclipses $3 trillion annually, and Sanders projects that the annual price tag of his Medicare all plan will be $1.38 trillion.

Footing the bill

Eliminating programs that duplicate healthcare services, such as Medicaid, will provide some savings, but taxes will pick up the bulk of the tab.

Sanders' tax plans include:
•A 6.2% income-based healthcare premium paid by employers.
•A 2.2% income-based premium paid by households.
•Progressive income tax rates ranging from 37% to 52% for high income earners making more than $250,000 per year.
•Taxing capital gains and dividends at income tax rates.
•Limiting tax deductions on people earning over $250,000.
•Boosting estate taxes on large estates above $3.5 million.

Most Americans will only be subject to the 2.2% premium tax, and because of that, Sanders estimates that a family of four earning $50,000 would pay just $466 per year into the single-payer program. If so, that could represent a significant savings given that -- even with subsidies -- most Obamacare enrollees still pay $100 per month for their insurance, plus co-pays and deductibles every year.

Instead, high-income earners will feel the pinch. Sanders' progressive income tax plan will tax Americans' earnings between $250,000 and $500,000 at 37%, and people earning more than $10 million will pay 52%. Currently, married couples filing jointly with income between $413,351 and $466,950 pay a 35% income tax rate, and the highest income tax rate is 39.6%.

More here: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/02/14/will-americans-get-bernt-by-sanders-tax-plan.aspx
February 11, 2016

Hillary Clinton is losing the votes of young women to Bernie Sanders

>snip<

Interviews with young female Sanders supporters by various media outlets prior to the New Hampshire vote revealed Clinton’s problem. For these 20-something women, gender is not a major consideration. Sure, they would like to see a woman become president and expect that to happen in the near future, but they are not especially enthused by the too-familiar female candidate asking for their votes this year. These young women adore Bernie because he is honest, idealistic and bravely radical. They are shunning Hillary because, in their eyes, she is devious, boringly pragmatic and as conventional as mom jeans.

>snip<

“The reason Wall Street is dropping zillions of quarters into Hillary's Super PAC-Man machine isn't because it wants change — it's because Wall Street sees revenue in her promises of keeping things much the same,” Wood writes. “Under Hillary, our prisons will continue to punish for profit. Our schools will continue to be sold off to private contractors. And despite 87% of Democrats standing behind universal healthcare, Hillary insists it will ‘never, ever come to pass.’ Not from her, I guess, since she's taken over $13 million from the healthcare industry.”


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-hillary-losing-young-women-20160210-story.html

February 11, 2016

I made this...



Profile Information

Name: California Kid
Gender: Male
Hometown: Northern California
Member since: Wed Nov 17, 2010, 02:02 PM
Number of posts: 11,665
Latest Discussions»Playinghardball's Journal