Donald Trump

[jimmy eat jazz]

My impression is that the service I receive from government entities is significantly worse than the service I receive from the private sector. If a private sector company imitated DMV's service practices they would soon be out of business.

Yes but the DMV is one of hundreds of government agencies. Personally, I've never had issues with the US Postal Service, it's always delivered my mail on time and never, ever lost a letter or package. SS admin gets out millions of payments on time, etc. For every example of an inefficient government agency, there is a well-run government agency providing good service delivery.

Meanwhile, there are any number of horribly run corporations that remain horribly run for long periods of time. Read up on the auto industry history if you don't believe me, for example.

My point is that such broad stereotypes aren't helpful for such important policy issues. That AND evidence that many countries that do have a publicly run health care system deliver better health outcomes at a lower cost than the US, so it seems that it is not axiomatic that public sector = worse than private sector or that public sector = poor quality/service delivery.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Yes but the DMV is one of hundreds of government agencies. Personally, I've never had issues with the US Postal Service, it's always delivered my mail on time and never, ever lost a letter or package. SS admin gets out millions of payments on time, etc. For every example of an inefficient government agency, there is a well-run government agency providing good service delivery.

Meanwhile, there are any number of horribly run corporations that remain horribly run for long periods of time. Read up on the auto industry history if you don't believe me, for example.

My point is that such broad stereotypes aren't helpful for such important policy issues. That AND evidence that many countries that do have a publicly run health care system deliver better health outcomes at a lower cost than the US, so it seems that it is not axiomatic that public sector = worse than private sector or that public sector = poor quality/service delivery.

I has a mailman that would throw packages at doors. Kick them down the sidewalk, etc. Multiple neighbors complained and they never fired him. He would skip delivery and when we called to complain he responded that there was a dog in the yard and he didn't feel safe. We did not have a dog... The lines at USPS are long, prices are just as high as the private shippers, yet they lose $$$.

I can't think of one governmental entity that does a good some as a similarly situated private company.

And in regards to other countries health care. Did you ever wonder why they can provide top medicine for low cost? It is because the U.S. subsidies all of the R&D, and overhead for the medical and drug companies. The drug companies charge us a much higher cost than the rest of the world. If we went single payer, the quality of care would drop across the world as the medical companies wouldn't be subsidized by us anymore. Tons of literature on this including a thread on here that links to lots of data.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Yes but the DMV is one of hundreds of government agencies. Personally, I've never had issues with the US Postal Service, it's always delivered my mail on time and never, ever lost a letter or package. SS admin gets out millions of payments on time, etc. For every example of an inefficient government agency, there is a well-run government agency providing good service delivery.

Meanwhile, there are any number of horribly run corporations that remain horribly run for long periods of time. Read up on the auto industry history if you don't believe me, for example.

My point is that such broad stereotypes aren't helpful for such important policy issues. That AND evidence that many countries that do have a publicly run health care system deliver better health outcomes at a lower cost than the US, so it seems that it is not axiomatic that public sector = worse than private sector or that public sector = poor quality/service delivery.

SS? LOL. You're talking about a government agency whose own internal audits show that they made an estimated $6.5 billion in overpayments and $1.5 billion in underpayments in fiscal 2009?

 

[JazzGal]

Just tried to listen to the Romney speech, but only heard the first couple of minutes. Then people came into my office and made me work. I hate that.

He isn't running and he isn't endorsing a candidate (other than the "anyone but Trump" GOP candidate, apparently). That's about as far as I got.

 

[Jamezz]

If Trump wins the nomination just how many republican big shots jump ship and endorse this guy.

I wished he was given a shot at the debates a la Ross Perot. People need to understand there are more viable options. I like Gary.

 

[Red]

I has a mailman that would throw packages at doors. Kick them down the sidewalk, etc. Multiple neighbors complained and they never fired him. He would skip delivery and when we called to complain he responded that there was a dog in the yard and he didn't feel safe. We did not have a dog... The lines at USPS are long, prices are just as high as the private shippers, yet they lose $$$.

I can't think of one governmental entity that does a good some as a similarly situated private company.

And in regards to other countries health care. Did you ever wonder why they can provide top medicine for low cost? It is because the U.S. subsidies all of the R&D, and overhead for the medical and drug companies. The drug companies charge us a much higher cost than the rest of the world. If we went single payer, the quality of care would drop across the world as the medical companies wouldn't be subsidized by us anymore. Tons of literature on this including a thread on here that links to lots of data.

The reason the Postal Service came under great financial pressure is that in, 2006, Congress passed a measure requiring the Postal Service to prefund all retiree health care benefits for the next 75 years, and to do so in 10 years. Believe this required a payment of over $5 billion a year. Imposed just before the Great Recession, and in an era of declining first class mail volume due to the Internet. No other agency, federal or private faces a financial obligation to prefund the retiree health care benefits of employees not yet born. That did not help, and has led to a USPS with hiring only of part time employees getting half the pay. You will find the unions convinced there is an effort to privatize the USPS by bad business practice today. Once privatized, there goes universal service for universal price....

 

[Red]

Just tried to listen to the Romney speech, but only heard the first couple of minutes. Then people came into my office and made me work. I hate that.

He isn't running and he isn't endorsing a candidate (other than the "anyone but Trump" GOP candidate, apparently). That's about as far as I got.

It was an extraordinary moment to see. Seemed unprecedented to me to see the level of scathing denunciation of the GOP front runner. Basically he urged a brokered convention by asking voters to vote for whatever GOP candidate other then Trump stood best chance in each state in turn.

Regarding seeing thousands of Muslims cheering the fall of the Twin Towers:

"His imagination must not be married to real power"

 

[Red]

This is Romney's full speech. Unfortunately, this video forces you to watch a few minutes of the press/audience milling around without being able to simply start at the point of the speech. Watching CNN at the moment, it sounds like a full fledge war among members of the GOP is exploding all over the place. Incredible day....

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I9vd4kOJwzg

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I hate that Romney's speech was on teleprompter, but he made some good comments. The strategy he's calling on to defeat Trump would create pure chaos. Does Romney think the party would align behind him in a brokered convention? Would he want that? The most likely outcome is a fractured Republican party.

The debate tonight is must-watch TV.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Romney is going to really slam Trump in a press conference today. Going to call him a "phony" and a "fraud" and will urge voters to reject him:

https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/mitt-romney-presidential-race-speech/

(CNN)Former GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney thinks "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud" and that he's "playing the American public for suckers," according to prepared remarks provided by Romney to CNN.

Romney, the party's nominee in 2012, will urge Americans "to make the right choices" and not support the GOP front runner during a speech he'll give today at 11:30 a.m. ET at the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics Forum.

That the Republican establishment is hoping that an 11th hour anti-Trump speech by Romney will turn the tide just goes to show how delusional and out flanked it is by this point.

Really, Romney of all people turning the tide? It's utterly laughable that they think this guy has any cred with Trump supporters to change his supporters' minds. His supporters are ANTI establishment and Romney is the very embodiment of the establishment.

 

[Red]

Reactions can change with the passage of time. But, with that hypothetical qualification, I have to say, that just in terms of American political history over the past 50 years, from Kennedy forward in my own conscious memory in other words, that was one of the most incredible jaw dropping 15 minutes or so I've ever heard. It really could go down as a dagger to the heart of the GOP by it's last standard bearer. Insane level of political theater.

So many early commentators focusing on Romney ignoring the massive electorate attracted to Trump. Fair point to say the least. Going for a brokered convention. The whole "Romney strategy" going forward is apparently to back whoever can beat Trump in each state. Just jump from alternative candidate to alternative candidate to deny a first ballot win. After first ballot, delegates are free to vote as they please, not as committed. IMO, needed to start this approach far earlier. I can understand why Romney would decline to run, but he may end up a write in winner at the most insane GOP convention of our lifetime.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Reactions can change with the passage of time. But, with that hypothetical qualification, I have to say, that just in terms of American political history over the past 50 years, from Kennedy forward in my own conscious memory in other words, that was one of the most incredible jaw dropping 15 minutes or so I've ever heard. It really could go down as a dagger to the heart of the GOP by it's last standard bearer. Insane level of political theater.

So many early commentators focusing on Romney ignoring the massive electorate attracted to Trump. Fair point to say the least. Going for a brokered convention. The whole "Romney strategy" going forward is apparently to back whoever can beat Trump in each state. Just jump from alternative candidate to alternative candidate to deny a first ballot win. After first ballot, delegates are free to vote as they please, not as committed. IMO, needed to start this approach far earlier. I can understand why Romney would decline to run, but he may end up a write in winner at the most insane GOP convention of our lifetime.

Yep, but if this happened imagine the results. Trumps most loyal supporters would be even more fanatical. His ego wouldn't allow him not to run as an independent. The republican vote would be split, virtually handing the White House to Hillary who will have only escaped Federal indictment due to her political influence. Insane.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I has a mailman that would throw packages at doors. Kick them down the sidewalk, etc. Multiple neighbors complained and they never fired him. He would skip delivery and when we called to complain he responded that there was a dog in the yard and he didn't feel safe. We did not have a dog... The lines at USPS are long, prices are just as high as the private shippers, yet they lose $$$.

So, out of curiosity, what was the margin or error and confidence level of your sample size of 1?

My mailman doesn't do that, so my sample size of 1 cancels out your sample size of 1.

My local dry cleaner lost one of my shirts. Guess that means all privately run companies are incomptent.

The USPS loses money because it is not allowed to operate as a fully private company. As a public entity, it served multiple stakeholders and fulfills multiple objectives and serves many masters. It operates by an entirely different set of rules than a private company does.

Comparing publicly run companies to privately run ones, and pretending that the former operate under the same rules as the latter, is naive and wrong.

I can't think of one governmental entity that does a good some as a similarly situated private company.

See above.

And one should assume, of course, that your limited anecdotal experience is representative of the entire spectrum of possibilities. Right?

And in regards to other countries health care. Did you ever wonder why they can provide top medicine for low cost? It is because the U.S. subsidies all of the R&D, and overhead for the medical and drug companies. The drug companies charge us a much higher cost than the rest of the world. If we went single payer, the quality of care would drop across the world as the medical companies wouldn't be subsidized by us anymore. Tons of literature on this including a thread on here that links to lots of data.

So, the US government subsidizes all the R&D for non-US medical and drug companies? You do realize that there ARE drug and medical companies that are not located in the US, right?

 

[Red]

That the Republican establishment is hoping that an 11th hour anti-Trump speech by Romney will turn the tide just goes to show how delusional and out flanked it is by this point.

Really, Romney of all people turning the tide? It's utterly laughable that they think this guy has any cred with Trump supporters to change his supporters' minds. His supporters are ANTI establishment and Romney is the very embodiment of the establishment.

Without disagreeing with your accessment, I do want to note, that for anti-Trump individuals like myself, he nailed the feelings underlying our alarm at seeing a power grab by a demagogue build up a head of steam, surge ahead, and become the overwhelming front runner. Just as a student of history alone, the whole Trump phenomenon is jaw dropping to me, since he utilizes the tools of the demagogue so skillfully.
It just makes my head spin as I hear him call himself a unifier even as google search queries on "moving to Canada" are up 350+% since Super Tuesday. He's gone out of his way to preach divisiveness. I thought Romney actually eloquently nailed the fears of many Americans. Even as I am sure you are correct in any effect on Trump supporters. Perhaps the nation itself inches closer to civil war. Who knows what history will have to say on this extraordinary election cycle?

 

[Red]

Yep, but if this happened imagine the results. Trumps most loyal supporters would be even more fanatical. His ego wouldn't allow him not to run as an independent. The republican vote would be split, virtually handing the White House to Hillary who will have only escaped Federal indictment due to her political influence. Insane.

Yes, all the more reason why, in political history, this day, not even over yet, is just extraordinary. I have never, ever, seen anything like this.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

SS? LOL. You're talking about a government agency whose own internal audits show that they made an estimated $6.5 billion in overpayments and $1.5 billion in underpayments in fiscal 2009?

Yep I am. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand that public and private entities have different objectives, different stakeholders, different lines of accountability and measuring performance, and different funding sources (with much different methods of raising funds).

You are taking a complex issue and reducing it to a silly, naive ideological talking point: private sector = GOOD, public sector = BAD.

Both can provide services efficiently and in good quality and both can do so inefficiently and in poor quality. Personally, I think that, on balance, the private sector does a better job in terms of efficiency and quality. And, all else equal, given a choice between private and public provision, I'd choose the former. BUT, the private sector operates under a very different set of rules. Yet this very obvious truth is never acknowledged by those whose knee jerk tendency is to criticize the government and lionize the private sector. Just because your knee is jerking spasmodically doesn't mean you've discovered some underlying truth.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Without disagreeing with your accessment, I do want to note, that for anti-Trump individuals like myself, he nailed the feelings underlying our alarm at seeing a power grab by a demagogue build up a head of steam, surge ahead, and become the overwhelming front runner. Just as a student of history alone, the whole Trump phenomenon is jaw dropping to me, since he utilizes the tools of the demagogue so skillfully.
It just makes my head spin as I hear him call himself a unifier even as google search queries on "moving to Canada" are up 350+% since Super Tuesday. He's gone out of his way to preach divisiveness. I thought Romney actually eloquently nailed the fears of many Americans. Even as I am sure you are correct in any effect on Trump supporters. Perhaps the nation itself inches closer to civil war. Who knows what history will have to say on this extraordinary election cycle?

I agree with everything you've said.

I'd just say in reply to Republicans, you made this bed, now you must lay in it. Only, Dear God, please don't make the rest of us, who didn't spend the last 8 years pandering to the very people who are on the verge of making Trump the Republican nominee, lay in it too.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Yep I am. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand that public and private entities have different objectives, different stakeholders, different lines of accountability and measuring performance, and different funding sources (with much different methods of raising funds).

You are taking a complex issue and reducing it to a silly, naive ideological talking point: private sector = GOOD, public sector = BAD.

Both can provide services efficiently and in good quality and both can do so inefficiently and in poor quality. Personally, I think that, on balance, the private sector does a better job in terms of efficiency and quality. And, all else equal, given a choice between private and public provision, I'd choose the former. BUT, the private sector operates under a very different set of rules. Yet this very obvious truth is never acknowledged by those whose knee jerk tendency is to criticize the government and lionize the private sector. Just because your knee is jerking spasmodically doesn't mean you've discovered some underlying truth.

My knee is jerking because I see the waste of billions in taxpayer money as a giant problem.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I agree with everything you've said.

I'd just say in reply to Republicans, you made this bed, now you must lay in it. Only, Dear God, please don't make the rest of us, who didn't spend the last 8 years pandering to the very people who are on the verge of making Trump the Republican nominee, lay in it too.

Who have they pandered to? Trump is a result of the electorate's massive dissatisfaction with the political establishment, not of their pandering. And so the Dems feel like America should lay in their bed because they are on the verge of nominating their own narcissistic liar? Those who live in glass houses...

Both parties have enormous problems.

 

[Red]

Yep, but if this happened imagine the results. Trumps most loyal supporters would be even more fanatical. His ego wouldn't allow him not to run as an independent. The republican vote would be split, virtually handing the White House to Hillary who will have only escaped Federal indictment due to her political influence. Insane.

Maybe a Catch-22 in play. Trump himself increases divisiveness in the nation. Opposing Trump furthers the polarization by angering Trump's supporters even further. No doubt making them even more determined to see him win. Unfortunately, this is the kind of Catch-22 that can scar the nation for a long time. I don't want to overthink it, or sink myself into some morass of fear and loathing over the 2016 election. It's a shame we don't seem to have the kind of leader anywhere who can actually unify Americans at this point in our history. We need a leader who can not only inspire our higher natures, not our baser instincts, but address our real problems in a manner that makes us all want to chip in and do our part. Everywhere I look I see political opportunists. I do not see that leader that can truly inspire and unify liberal and conservative alike. Somebody who transcends partisanship.