2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Something unprecedented happened this year
Aren’t these ACA marketplaces selling plans from private companies but subsidized?
So it could be that the plans themselves don’t include transgender healthcare but the company could have other plans that do in which case you will still be subsidizing them while removing the benefit for the end consumer.
Actually you will be subsidizing the plans of people who have transgender healthcare coverage who share companies with state subsidized plans.
Unless you want to pass a federal law bann
The federal government money stipulation already has precedent in the Hyde amendment, which is a weird thing congress renews annually and forbids the use of federal Money for abortion (it exists since 1977) except in case of like risk for the mother iirc.
That means that ACA subsidized plans and medicaid don't actually cover abortion outside those limited cases. Some states pay the difference out of pocket to cover those women, many don't.
Marketplaces aren't subsidized except for what the government gives to customers to help pay premia afaik.
Says the guy who has no grasp on what moral truth means and who had to have self awareness explained to him.
Dude, you didn't explain jack ****. You said a bunch of word salad that lots of people told you was word salad (not just me) and you stuck your fingers in your ears and went "LA LA LA I can't hear you and I have god on my side" which I have to admit, was a touch of comedic genius, although I'm pretty sure it wasn't intended as such.
Not his fault if you can't hear God's voice. Maybe get your ears waxed?
Dude, you didn't explain jack ****. You said a bunch of word salad that lots of people told you was word salad (not just me) and you stuck your fingers in your ears and went "LA LA LA I can't hear you and I have god on my side" which I have to admit, was a touch of comedic genius, although I'm pretty sure it wasn't intended as such.
Yeah, this happened only in your mind my friend.
For your purposes, does it matter whether transgender care is "medical care"? I assume that your position is that tax dollars should not be going toward medical care.
I have preferences with different priorities but for example I would clearly not have any problem with public employees getting healthcare from public money, why would I? It can be part of a normal compensation package.
And I have no problems with the idea that prisoners have to receive medial care either.
So yes identifying trans care as healthcare or not is pretty important. If it truly uncontroversially was, Harris position about the state paying for a prisoner transition would be not only obvious, but the only constitutional possibility as well.
I would prefer the state didn't subsidize healthcare or anything else directly but I am not against any welfare ever, at least not as strongly as I am against other government distortions.
But I prefer for welfare to be small (has to be lower than min wage, can't dissuade people from working) and in cash , and as universal as possible. UBI isn't terrible.
Disability pensions aren't the worst either, at least as a concept, at least in very rich countries and when given only to citizens
You gave the picture of an argument that doesn’t go through. You can still be a hedonist and a vegan at the same time… It isn’t necessarily a health thing or a virtue thing, just a belief that animals have certain rights.
.
Hm no? Even if you believe in super strong animal rights, you aren't against people having pet I suppose (or at least I never met someone who was).
And a pet hen will make eggs and you can eat them, and when she is at the end of her life you make broth with her.
I actually met a few people that tried to consume animal products like that and only like that (no factory farming and so on), that's very consistent ethically.
Outright veganism isn't, it requires the health justification.
Similar considerations apply for "animals" who don't suffer like clams. Indeed a very few vegans exists that eat oysters and clams, but that's not the normal claim
Moderately NSFW
For anyone who cares and wants to check it out for the lols, the conversation in question starts around this post (and goes on for quite some time):
I mean humans crossculturally have also practiced certain things like human sacrifice, slavery, infanticide, blood sports, dueling, war rape, selling of women all of which can be said to inflame the same tendencies that you are speaking of. I don’t think that just because those practices are rampant that they have some kind of moral legitimacy.
At the end of the day you are trying to say x is moral because we evolved doing x in very colorful language. If it’s about health then that
The argument is that *having fun is a health issue*. We won't probably ever reach the point where "healthcare" covers a vacation or massages or accessing spa treatments or buying healthy nutritious and tasty food but you know living a good life in that sense improves health./
As for the other behaviors that we are evolved to enjoy or use to satisfy urges, I am in favor of all the voluntary ones.
As you might imagine I am VERY in favor of the corrida which vividly encapsulates what we are talking about
For anyone who cares and wants to check it out for the lols, the conversation in question starts around this post (and goes on for quite some time):
Yes, and directly after those posts a number of posters explained to you exactly why your definitions make no sense. So what is it exactly is it that happened only in my imagination?
The argument is that *having fun is a health issue*. We won't probably ever reach the point where "healthcare" covers a vacation or massages or accessing spa treatments or buying healthy nutritious and tasty food but you know living a good life in that sense improves health./
As for the other behaviors that we are evolved to enjoy or use to satisfy urges, I am in favor of all the voluntary ones.
As you might imagine I am VERY in favor of the corrida which vividly encapsulates what we are talking a
If your child is being attacked by a gang of violent thugs, and you shield his body from the blows with your own, it will be very bad for your health indeed.
So I don’t see why we should take “is healthy” as “is moral” when there are sentient beings involved.
If it was healthy for you to daily rape a woman, would you be arguing that your health trumps any moral consideration? Of course not.
Your worldview just falls apart at the most basic philosophical level if this is the basis of it.
Interesting segment here on Trump demographics. GOP today more diverse than ever and they've actually lost white votes since 2012 and I'm curious for people's takes on that. White people running from Trump because the white supremacy abhors them whereas Hispanics and Asians want some of the white supremacy adjacent action or what are the theories there?
Yes, and directly after those posts a number of posters explained to you exactly why your definitions make no sense. So what is it exactly is it that happened only in my imagination?
Just because you and others can’t grasp moral truth, that doesn’t make it “word salad” to correctly say that moral truth is aimed at the good.
And the funniest part of the discussion btw is when you accuse me of lacking self awareness and introspection.
Interesting segment here on Trump demographics. GOP today more diverse than ever and they've actually lost white votes since 2012 and I'm curious for people's takes on that. White people running from Trump because the white supremacy abhors them whereas Hispanics and Asians want some of the white supremacy adjacent action or what are the theories there?
The white shift (just 4 points meaning 2% of whites swapped party) is more than entirely explained by unmarried women with a college degree, a very specific niche of the demographic which the democratic party has courted succesfully , tailoring policy proposals on their preferences while at the same time manipulating their preferences themselves through academia brainwashing.
Just because you and others can’t grasp moral truth, that doesn’t make it “word salad” to correctly say that moral truth is aimed at the good.
I'm sure you're right and everyone else is wrong, that's the only reasonable explanation here.
And the funniest part of the discussion btw is when you accuse me of lacking self awareness and introspection.
I agree bro, that was pretty hilarious, especially given the above. Who'd have thought we have similar tastes in comedy?
So if you believe the 2020 vote counts how do you account for the large number of people who mysteriously just disappeared between 2020 and 2024.
Very strange.
After 4 years of Trump's clown show and insensitive mishandling of covid, everyone had enough and went out to the polls. This election they weren't inspired and stayed at home, which is a vote for Trump.
This isn't really all that complicated, and after a few months of Trump v2, people will remember why they came out in droves against Trump in 2020.
What are you buying and why can't you afford it?
He does, but I'll further deflect from your point and be a nit and specify that Jordan was never cut; he simply didn't make the varsity team at 15-years-old and was placed on the junior varsity team because they went with a 6'7" player instead of the then 5'10" Jordan whose defense sucked.
If your child is being attacked by a gang of violent thugs, and you shield his body from the blows with your own, it will be very bad for your health indeed.
So I don’t see why we should take “is healthy” as “is moral” when there are sentient beings involved.
If it was healthy for you to daily rape a woman, would you be arguing that your health trumps any moral consideration? Of course not.
Your worldview just falls apart at the most basic philosophical level if this i
If it was healthy and biologically predisposed and it was how reproduction happened and we had evolved to have rape as the main way to do that, like it is for ducks, then yes.
You can't use what is common sense morality now ("raping is terrible") as the basis for what would be common sense morality if we had wildly different biology and that exactly because what's moral is predicated on biology, is interlinked with its effects on the individual and the group in term of prosperity (or if you want, fitness).
Your example of risking to protect a child isn't the same category of behavior that regards yourself alone.
The choice to extend "rights" (inherent values) to something which isn't member of your species is an arbitrary one which has no relationship with anything else we discussed up to this point except that it reduces material prosperity and we'll being of humans, which is what makes it inherently immoral.
The only source of what is moral is us and only us (at most, all of us, and that's already very controversial, otherwise a subset of us).
After 4 years of Trump's clown show and insensitive mishandling of covid, everyone had enough and went out to the polls. This election they weren't inspired and stayed at home, which is a vote for Trump.
.
Turnout in 2024 is on track of being very close to 2020 (still waiting for full data because democrat led states are redicolous in counting votes).
Pretty wild to claim the bold
I'm sure you're right and everyone else is wrong, that's the only reasonable explanation here.
I agree bro, that was pretty hilarious, especially given the above. Who'd have thought we have similar tastes in comedy?
As human beings, we aim at the good. Most people lack self awareness, so most people don’t realize this.
We don’t aim at random facts.
Now, go ahead and explain, as someone who is familiar with my posting history, why it’s surprising I’m not a young earth creationist. Be specific.
Now, go ahead and explain, as someone who is familiar with my posting history, why it’s surprising I’m not a young earth creationist. Be specific.
Because you're super religious (believing in a personal god who actually exists rather than just some vague idea of a god and all that), you're super eccentric, and you strike me as a bit of a dumb-dumb, basically the YEC trifecta.
Because you're super religious (believing in a personal god who actually exists and all that), you're eccentric, and you strike me as a bit of a dumb-dumb, basically the YEC trifecta.
He isn't dogmatic though, he speaks in riddles, rarely makes falsifiable claims, and has never displayed a violent authoritarian attitude unlike theocrats tend to do
