HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Baobab » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... 28 Next »

Baobab

Profile Information

Member since: Thu Feb 25, 2016, 09:12 AM
Number of posts: 4,667

Journal Archives

Bad Chemistry: How the Chemical Industry’s Trade Association Undermines the Policies that Protect Us

Bad Chemistry: How the Chemical Industry’s Trade Association Undermines the Policies that Protect Us

Differences between Hillary and Obama? Let me start this, Hillary is Female.

This is a thread to discuss the differences between Obama and Hillary if any exist.

I can think of one big difference, Hillary is a WOMAN. So that makes her different than most (Male) politicians.

Perhaps in some women it would mean less ego, more cooperation?

If Hillary won she would be the first Female President in a country overwhelmingly dominated by Male politicians.

So right there she genetically looks a lot different than traditional Male politicians. Females of the species have two X chromosomes, while men have one X and one Y. Also, females create oocytes. Males don't. A very important difference.

Women's endocrine system also produces estrogen which makes Women more resistant to hardship in some ways. Their bodies carry more fat so in times of famine, they live longer.

U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6

Report from The United States: State Health Reform Flatlines (2008)

http://www.pnhp.org/states_flatline/State%20Health%20Reform%20Flatlines%20IJHS%20-%202008.pdf


Massachusetts’ recent health reform has generated laudatory headlines and a flurry of interest in state-based initiatives to achieve universal health insurance coverage.

In 1988, a similar Massachusetts effort was also acclaimed and was imitated by several other states. Unfortunately, none
of those efforts can be judged a success. The authors briefly review this earlier experience and caution against premature declaration of victory.

COSTS AND BENEFITS OF NEOLIBERALISM: A Class Analysis - Gerard DUMENIL and Dominique LEVY

http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/financial/fin_dumenil.pdf


web site of authors:
http://www.cepremap.ens.fr/levy/

Single Payer is NOT 'more expensive' its LESS, And we already pay 2/3! Here's proof

The Current and Projected Taxpayer Shares of US Health Costs.

David U. Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler.

American Journal of Public Health: March 2016, Vol. 106, No. 3, pp. 449-452.
doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997


Download PDF

Objectives. We estimated taxpayers’ current and projected share of US health expenditures, including government payments for public employees’ health benefits as well as tax subsidies to private health spending.

Methods. We tabulated official Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services figures on direct government spending for health programs and public employees’ health benefits for 2013, and projected figures through 2024. We calculated the value of tax subsidies for private spending from official federal budget documents and figures for state and local tax collections.

Results. Tax-funded health expenditures totaled $1.877 trillion in 2013 and are projected to increase to $3.642 trillion in 2024. Government’s share of overall health spending was 64.3% of national health expenditures in 2013 and will rise to 67.1% in 2024. Government health expenditures in the United States account for a larger share of gross domestic product (11.2% in 2013) than do total health expenditures in any other nation.

Conclusions. Contrary to public perceptions and official Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates, government funds most health care in the United States. Appreciation of government’s predominant role in health funding might encourage more appropriate and equitable targeting of health expenditures.



Read More: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997

Contrary to popular perceptions, taxpayers fund 64 percent of U.S. health care, more public dollars

Government funds nearly two-thirds of U.S. health care costs: American Journal of Public Health study
Contrary to popular perceptions, taxpayers fund 64 percent of U.S. health care, more public dollars per capita than the citizens of other nations – including those with universal health programs.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302997


Objectives. We estimated taxpayers’ current and projected share of US health expenditures, including government payments for public employees’ health benefits as well as tax subsidies to private health spending.

Methods. We tabulated official Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services figures on direct government spending for health programs and public employees’ health benefits for 2013, and projected figures through 2024. We calculated the value of tax subsidies for private spending from official federal budget documents and figures for state and local tax collections.

Results. Tax-funded health expenditures totaled $1.877 trillion in 2013 and are projected to increase to $3.642 trillion in 2024. Government’s share of overall health spending was 64.3% of national health expenditures in 2013 and will rise to 67.1% in 2024. Government health expenditures in the United States account for a larger share of gross domestic product (11.2% in 2013) than do total health expenditures in any other nation.

Conclusions. Contrary to public perceptions and official Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates, government funds most health care in the United States. Appreciation of government’s predominant role in health funding might encourage more appropriate and equitable targeting of health expenditures.

The thing that makes the bad people mad is

talking about substantiative issues.

Arizona's election appears to have been A LOT closer than we thought

Must read article at
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-abramson/sanders-currently-winning-democratic-primary-race-ill-prove-to-you_b_9528076.html




Bernie Sanders has terrible name recognition in states where he hasn’t advertised or campaigned yet; meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has universal name recognition everywhere. Realizing this, the Clinton camp pushed hard to rack up the early vote in every state where early voting was an option. They did this not primarily for the reason we’ve been told — because Clinton performs well among older voters, and older voters are more likely to vote early than other age demographics — but rather because they knew that early votes are almost always cast before the election season actually begins in a given state.

That’s right — in each state, most of the early primary voting occurs before the candidates have aired any commercials or held any campaign events. For Bernie Sanders, this means that early voting happens, pretty much everywhere, before anyone knows who he is. Certainly, early voting occurs in each state before voters have developed a sufficient level of familiarity and comfort with Sanders to vote for him.

But on Election Day — among voters who’ve been present and attentive for each candidate’s commercials, local news coverage, and live events — Sanders tends to tie or beat Clinton.

In fact, that’s the real reason Sanders does well in caucuses.

It’s not because caucuses “require a real time investment,” as the media likes to euphemistically say, but because caucuses require that you vote on Election Day rather than well before it.

Consider: in North Carolina, Hillary Clinton only won Election Day voting 52% to 48%. Given the shenanigans in evidence during the live voting there — thousands of college students were turned away from the polls due to insufficient identification under a new voter-suppression statute in the state — it wouldn’t be unfair to call that 4-point race more like a 2-point one (51% to 49% for Clinton).

Consider: on Super Tuesday 3, because early voting is always reported first, Clinton’s margins of victory were originally believed to be 25 points in Missouri, 30 points in Illinois, and 30 points in Ohio. Missouri, which doesn’t have conventional early voting, ended up a tie. Illinois ended up with a 1.8% margin for Clinton (after being a 42-point race in Clinton’s favor just a week earlier) and Ohio a 13.8% margin.



Hmmmmmmm...



Any one of us could do the math there. And yet the media never did.

Consider: in Arizona yesterday, the election was called almost immediately by the media, with Clinton appearing to “win” the state by a margin of 61.5% to 36.1%. Of course, this was all early voting. CNN even wrongly reported that these early votes constituted the live vote in 41% of all Arizona precincts — rather than merely mail-in votes constituting a percentage of the total projected vote in the state — which allowed most Americans to go to bed believing both that Clinton had won Arizona by more than 25 points and that that margin was the result of nearly half of Arizona’s precincts reporting their live-voting results. Neither was true.

In fact, as of the time of that 61.5% to 36.1% “win,” not a single precinct in Arizona had reported its Election Day results.

Indeed, more than two and a half hours after polls closed in Arizona, officials there had counted only 54,000 of the estimated 431,000 Election Day ballots.

That’s about 12%.

So how did Bernie Sanders do on Election Day in Arizona?

As of the writing of this essay (2:45 AM ET), Sanders was leading Clinton in Election Day voting in Arizona 50.2% to 49.8%, with just under 75,000 votes (about 17.3% of all Election Day votes) counted.

So imagine, for a moment, that early votes were reported to the media last rather than first. Which, of course, they quite easily could be, given that they’re less — rather than more — reflective of the actual state of opinion on Election Day. Were early votes reported last rather than first, Arizona as of 2:45 AM ET would have been considered not only too close to call but a genuine nail-biter. In fact, only 400 or so Election Day votes were separating the two Democratic candidates at that point — though the momentum with each new vote counted was quite clearly in Sanders’ favor.

So the question becomes, why does any of this matter? Does the point being made here — that Bernie Sanders is as or more popular than Hillary in both all the states he won and many of the states he didn’t — gain Sanders a single delegate? Does it move him one inch closer to being President?

No.

What it does do is explain why the Clinton-Sanders race is a 5-point race nationally — just a hair from being a statistical tie, given the margin of error — despite the media treating Clinton’s nomination as a foregone conclusion.

What it does do is explain how Clinton is “beating” Sanders among American voters despite having a -13 favorability rating nationally, as compared to Sanders’ +11 rating. That dramatic difference is possible because in favorability polling, pollsters only count voters who say they know enough about a candidate to form an opinion. That eliminates the sort of “early voters” who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton before having much of a handle on who Bernie Sanders is.


And what it does do is explain why Sanders outperforms Clinton against Donald Trump in nearly every state where head-to-head general-election polling data is available. While some of this is undoubtedly due to the fact that Sanders beats Clinton by between 30 and 40 points among Independents — itself a major warning sign for a Clinton candidacy this fall — the rest is explained by the fact that when voters come to know Bernie Sanders as well as they already know Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, they tend to prefer him to these two by clear margins.

THIS IS WHY ALL ELECTIONS NEED TO BE HELD ON WEEKENDS OR HOLIDAYS

Some huge number of Arizonans spent an entire work day waiting in line to vote for Sanders.

Their ballots are no longer secret.

This is why Election Day needs to be a national holiday. It needs to be changed immediately.

Can all Democrats rally around the cause of democracy, please?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... 28 Next »