Millennials discover the reality of liberal government

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Bullshit. The deductibles are too high for the policies to have hardly any benefit at all. Try again.
There are certainly painfully high, but insurance in general should be for things beyond the normal. And for people with really bad health or expensive chronic needs there are plans (at least in some states) which have very high premiums but pay virtually everything (although certain needed medications or procedures may not be covered, so YMMV.) It's by far not my preference and like many it's costing me money, but it's not totally worthless.
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
What are you basing this on?

I believe the answer you seek is in that quotation: "Bullshit."


\what will the "righties" rage on next after Obamacare becomes more and more accepted and part of the norm?
\\BENGHAZI 2: THE BENGHAZNING!!!!
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I believe the answer you seek is in that quotation: "Bullshit."

\what will the "righties" rage on next after Obamacare becomes more and more accepted and part of the norm?
\\BENGHAZI 2: THE BENGHAZNING!!!!
See, this is the problem. One side insists Obamacare is the Devil's diarrhea while the other side insists that it's Christ in two thousand pages. Damned few things in this world are all good or all bad, and nothing produced by politicians.

Whether one believes Obamacare in a net positive or a net negative, why the fuck is it so difficult to admit it's not ALL positive or ALL negative? I make no pretense of being in the middle; why can I admit that and seemingly so few others can? Jesus, put on your big girl panties for a moment.

He makes a valid point; I don't agree with it, but certainly lots of Americans are experiencing sticker shock and even real economic distress from the often much higher prices and much higher deductibles. Surely one can be honest enough to admit that without suffering psychic damage or even conceding his conclusion that these high deductibles render it useless.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
See, this is the problem. One side insists Obamacare is the Devil's diarrhea while the other side insists that it's Christ in two thousand pages. Damned few things in this world are all good or all bad, and nothing produced by politicians.

Whether one believes Obamacare in a net positive or a net negative, why the fuck is it so difficult to admit it's not ALL positive or ALL negative? I make no pretense of being in the middle; why can I admit that and seemingly so few others can? Jesus, put on your big girl panties for a moment.

Sorry I don't buy your premise and I can probably speak for everyone on this board who doesn't think the ACA is complete garbage, when I say, no one thinks it's perfect in any way, shape, or form but it's certainly better than any alternative being presented!

But that doesn't fit your narrative so you will continue spouting BS from a starting point from which no one agrees with you.
 
Last edited:

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
Agreed, that's debatable, but his premise was that there was no benefit.

This was my first question to you on this matter:

Veliko said:
Superpowers come and go, they always have done and they always will.

How does being one benefit the average person within that particular nation? Is your average American better off than your average British/French/German/Australian as a result of that status?

You didn't actually answer either question (although you did say something like "The US being a superpower benefits Europe as much as it does the US"), so the premise that you are so critical of originated with yourself.
 
Last edited:

Fayd

Diamond Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,971
2
76
www.manwhoring.com
Projection of conventional power is limited to countries that don't have nukes, or to circumstances so limited that they won't employ them. And remember, under the conservative free market nukes and all conventional weapons should be open for sale by any corporation that wants to build them, so I'm wondering what you're complaining about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Spot on, IronWing.

If it wasn't for the Conservative/Neo-Con junta doing things like making treasonous pacts (on the cusp of the Great Recession) Inauguration Night to oppose every single thing Obama does, we might actually be in a booming economy again by now.

If it wasn't for that junta expending all their energy to kill the Affordable Care Act, in which that energy should have been use to help Americans by revising/strengthening the ACA, the ACA could actually work quite well. But oh yeah, the ACA isn't designed to be a money-maker mechanism for the insurance & drug lobbyists' companies, is it? lol

It's a very sad state of affairs that the conservative parties have taken on such radical right-wing platforms, that Democrats have had to essentially be just as (if not more so) conservative-leaning than even Ronald Reagan in order not to sound crazy themselves. Very pathetic, and not what America's founding fathers had fought for at all in what is suppose to be a Democratic society.

Obama isn't a liberal and very few liberal policies have been implemented in the past three decades with many liberal policies reverhttp://forums.anandtech.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=36223272sed so what are you going on about now?
 
Last edited:

f1r3s1d3

Senior member
Feb 18, 2006
534
0
0


Hope, change, and record numbers living at home with their parents.

Uno

Well I'm 22, I live with my GF in a cute safe apt w/driveway parking for both of our cars, I didn't graduate college (just HS), I work full time and have been with the same employer for 4 years progressively working my way up.

And I'm a conservative republican. Guess this liberal depression doesn't effect me. :D Also drive a nice car, and have some pretty cool stuff. I could be doing better, but I could be doing a lot worse.
 

Fayd

Diamond Member
Jun 28, 2001
7,971
2
76
www.manwhoring.com
If it wasn't for that junta expending all their energy to kill the Affordable Care Act, in which that energy should have been use to help Americans by revising/strengthening the ACA, the ACA could actually work quite well. But oh yeah, the ACA isn't designed to be a money-maker mechanism for the insurance & drug lobbyists' companies, is it? lol

Are you really that dumb? ACA mandates that *everybody* buys insurance. Ergo, everybody pays for insurance, everybody becomes a customer of an insurance company. This will only have the effect of increasing the profits of the insurance companies.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,327
10,230
136
I believe the answer you seek is in that quotation: "Bullshit."


\what will the "righties" rage on next after Obamacare becomes more and more accepted and part of the norm?
\\BENGHAZI 2: THE BENGHAZNING!!!!

Begine the Benghazning!
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
Are you really that dumb? ACA mandates that *everybody* buys insurance. Ergo, everybody pays for insurance, everybody becomes a customer of an insurance company. This will only have the effect of increasing the profits of the insurance companies.

lol is an abbreviation for Laughing Out Loud. In context, it often denotes a sarcastic tone.

In this case, I think he was pointing out that this "socialist" program is anything but.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Sorry I don't buy your premise and I can probably speak for everyone on this board who doesn't think the ACA is complete garbage, when I say, no one thinks it's perfect in any way, shape, or form but it's certainly better than any alternative being presented!

But that doesn't fit your narrative so you will continue spouting BS from a starting point from which no one agrees with you.
Yes, I totally believe that it's pure coincidence that every objectionable thing inside the ACA must be voraciously defended and anyone pointing out any problems is merely raising another strawman. It does not mean that you insist it is perfect, merely that no one has yet discovered these imperfections.

Honestly, one would think you guys would be bright enough to come up with at least one more argument so that every point need not be answered with squeals of "strawman".

This was my first question to you on this matter:

You didn't actually answer either question (although you did say something like "The US being a superpower benefits Europe as much as it does the US"), so the premise that you are so critical of originated with yourself.
I answered the second question; find someone to explain it to you if that is still in question. I would think the first would be self-explanatory, but as it appears not, here goes my one attempt:
Every nation has interests both economic and cultural. Many nations have similar interests - for example, Western civilization has largely the same general economic system and largely the same moral background. Every individual also has rights, but the extent and nature of those rights vary greatly between cultures, religions, and nations. As these rights are inherently in conflict - for instance, Western nations believe in freedom of religion, whereas Islamic nations believe everyone should ultimately be forced into Islam - some mechanism must exist to protect those rights. With me so far?

There is a human tendency to want to exploit others for personal benefit as well as a human tendency to want to force others to live by our own preferred system. If one nation chooses to conquer another, for either reason, then either that nation succeeds or something successfully defends the invaded nation. Thus every person has a vested interest in their nation being strong enough to defend them, or in having a friend powerful enough and willing to do so. This should be undeniable, so obviously having a powerful nation has a great deal of benefit. To what extent does that extend to superpower status?

Prior to World War II, the modern world had no superpowers. The closest would be the British Empire, but its power had greatly waned. Thus if two or more powerful nations wanted to join together they could overmatch any one other nation and either take their land or enforce their will on the hapless victim. Many regional wars and two world wars resulted, with great loss of life and wasted wealth, because the possible gain was worth the risk.

After World War II, the world had two superpowers, the USA and the USSR. The USSR was in rapid expansion mode; any nation it occupied, even while nominally friendly and helping to throw out the invaders, it kept. Its system was antithetical to Western civilization's values. Without the other superpower opposing it, the USSR would have easily overrun the world in detail, imposing the bondage of Marxism on every human being. Again, these are things that every thinking human being knows, with nothing controversial or even arguable. Only after the fall of the USSR can there even be a question of whether there is any benefit to being a superpower.

I'd answer that in three parts. First, if there is no superpower then any powerful nation so inclined can capture enough other nations in detail to make itself a superpower. Without the USA's military might, there can be no doubt that Red China would include Taiwan, Japan, and the rest of Southeast Asia. While this might not directly benefit us, there is no doubt that eventually it would, so the USA's superpowers is benefiting our interests. Second, our superpower status discourages war between other, weaker nations, because they have to figure in the probability that America will step in to reverse their aggression. As Americans we have a vested interest in the world remaining friendly to our values, so our superpower status allows us to ensure that nations with largely antithetical views and values do not conquer nations with views and values more aligned to our own. This also allows both sides to buy our products rather than spending their industry on killing each other, and of course they can also manufacture products to sell to us. Third, our superpower status prevents two or more powerful nations from banding together and attacking us; our military might makes it a losing proposition. Thus we gain a measure of security and don't have to fear that, say, Mexico might invade to gain Texas. This is still a world ruled by the aggressive use of force, or at least its threat. Added up, our superpower status allows us to prevent the world from becoming a place less friendly to ourselves and our values and interests.

That's my honest attempt to explain to you what virtually everyone knows. Feel free to cleverly reply "strawman". Second verse, same as the first.
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
That's one of the longest non-answers I've seen on Anandtech for quite some time.

What you've done is restate that your average American citizen isn't actually better off than your average British/French/German/Australian as a result of that status.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
That's one of the longest non-answers I've seen on Anandtech for quite some time.

What you've done is restate that your average American citizen isn't actually better off than your average British/French/German/Australian as a result of that status.
lol Okay. Please feel free to relocate to, say, Ukraine, where America's superpower status is nullified by Russia's proximity and regional strength.

Would you honestly be happier if America forced the rest of the world to pay us a tax?
 

Veliko

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2011
3,597
127
106
lol Okay. Please feel free to relocate to, say, Ukraine, where America's superpower status is nullified by Russia's proximity and regional strength.

Would you honestly be happier if America forced the rest of the world to pay us a tax?

What does Ukraine have to do with anything?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
What does Ukraine have to do with anything?
Sweet Lord.

Ukraine, where America's superpower status is nullified by Russia's proximity and regional strength.

Ukraine is what happens when there is no power sufficient to deter aggression. I realize there are some big words there, but still. If you wish to argue that being too powerful to invade has no benefit, then Ukraine has none of the overhead of being a superpower. Though you might want to try a European nation farther from Russia so that you can enjoy the benefit of America's strength without having to admit that benefit exists.
 

shady28

Platinum Member
Apr 11, 2004
2,520
397
126


Hope, change, and record numbers living at home with their parents.

Uno


Chart doesn't show the whole picture; there's no historical context.

Yes, the % of millennials living at home has gone up, but that isn't where the really big change is at. The really big change is that millenials are not getting married - and are far more likely to have roommates.

That too is probably a direct result of the poor economy, but it's something that's been going on for some time. Clearly, it got a lot worse real quick between 2007 and 2012 (ie, we went from 32/100 living at home to 36/100 in a relatively short time, while those with independent living arrangements went down overall):


SDT-millennials-with-parents-08-2013-02.png