Donald John Trump: The 2nd Greatest President of the USA (by volume)

[buka001]

Unlike that shocker directed at Mika, this latest tweet was true Trump genius. One of his best.

His speech on Saturday was also great.

Which tweet? The one about unemployment? A factor which he claimed last year was an unreliable statistic?

 

[Hamish McPanji]

Which tweet? The one about unemployment? A factor which he claimed last year was an unreliable statistic?

I think the CNN wrestling one. Got everyone distracted

 

[cerebus]

Trump and Buzz Aldrin:

COLONEL ALDRIN: Infinity and beyond. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: This is infinity here. It could be infinity. We don’t really don’t know. But it could be. It has to be something -- but it could be infinity, right?

Okay. (Applause.)

[video=youtube_share;4IXpeYtnEgs]https://youtu.be/4IXpeYtnEgs[/video]

 

[greg0205]

I never said you should change your mind, I'm questioning why you think your particular way of doing things should be considered a societal norm, especially given the platform the Dems were running on as part of the previous election.

Sorry this took a while... I thought I made it clear that those were my norms. That said, Dems are for equality and inclusion and yes, social welfare, as am I. Hillary was also light years better than 45 on environmental issues.
I know this is all really philosophical while we sit at the southern tip of Africa, but that's where I fit in the American political context. In terms of our own country, I could not hold our constitution, which addresses these specific issues, in higher regard... We'll disagree on the premise of a local NHI I'm sure... I don't mind my tax ZAR going into that pool... We might agree the biggest threat to the NHI 'tho is it's administration by inept and corrupt cadres, but that's where I stand.

 

[Garson007]

In terms of our own country, I could not hold our constitution, which addresses these specific issues, in higher regard... We'll disagree on the premise of a local NHI I'm sure... I don't mind my tax ZAR going into that pool... We might agree the biggest threat to the NHI 'tho is it's administration by inept and corrupt cadres, but that's where I stand.

We don't need an NHI, we need a better funded health department. Our medical system works really well as is. It just needs to be better funded at the lower end.

 

[konfab]

We don't need an NHI, we need a better funded health department. Our medical system works really well as is. It just needs to be better funded at the lower end.

Our medical system is pathologically corrupt. Only an idiot would think throwing more money at it would make it better.

 

[cerebus]

Our medical system is pathologically corrupt.

Even the pathology is pathologically corrupt.

 

[Garson007]

Our medical system is pathologically corrupt. Only an idiot would think throwing more money at it would make it better.

The SAPS is also pathologically corrupt. Should the government just set up a security insurance instead?

 

[Hamish McPanji]

Trump and Buzz Aldrin:



[video=youtube_share;4IXpeYtnEgs]https://youtu.be/4IXpeYtnEgs[/video]

This is 5D here. It could be 6D. We don’t really don’t know. But it could be. It has to be something -- but it could be 5D, right?

 

[konfab]

The SAPS is also pathologically corrupt. Should the government just set up a security insurance instead?

No.

They need a structural change as the source of the corruption is the lack of accountability due to the centralized nature of the system.

Dissolve the national depts of health and the national SAPS and place it fully under the control of provincial governments.

 

[Garson007]

No.

They need a structural change as the source of the corruption is the lack of accountability due to the centralized nature of the system.

Dissolve the national depts of health and the national SAPS and place it fully under the control of provincial governments.

Okay. We agree then.

We do not need public insurance schemes, we just need functioning Police / Fire / Health / Etc departments.

 

[Xarog]

Sorry this took a while... I thought I made it clear that those were my norms. That said, Dems are for equality and inclusion and yes, social welfare, as am I. Hillary was also light years better than 45 on environmental issues.
I know this is all really philosophical while we sit at the southern tip of Africa, but that's where I fit in the American political context. In terms of our own country, I could not hold our constitution, which addresses these specific issues, in higher regard... We'll disagree on the premise of a local NHI I'm sure... I don't mind my tax ZAR going into that pool... We might agree the biggest threat to the NHI 'tho is it's administration by inept and corrupt cadres, but that's where I stand.

I think everybody deserves to be included in society, but inclusion implies a certain willingness to conform to the norms of society, and those norms should favour equality of opportunity. I don't have an issue with a properly run NHI, but speaking locally the only thing I see the ANC managing is the total destruction of the country's healthcare system. Maybe if the DA comes to power it will be something to entertain.

I would certainly have favoured Bernie over Trump if only Bernie wasn't sabotaged by the Dems. But he was, and they deserve to eat schit for their sins. Trump is the perfect punishment for a really rotten system, but frankly the more of his time he wastes on inane vulgar nonsense, the less time is left to screw over the rest of the planet through some impulsive bufoonery.

 

[Xarog]

No.

They need a structural change as the source of the corruption is the lack of accountability due to the centralized nature of the system.

Dissolve the national depts of health and the national SAPS and place it fully under the control of provincial governments.

So you're basically saying that the system, if properly run, should give out free healthcare to those who couldn't afford it any other way?

 

[greg0205]

I think everybody deserves to be included in society, but inclusion implies a certain willingness to conform to the norms of society, and those norms should favour equality of opportunity. I don't have an issue with a properly run NHI, but speaking locally the only thing I see the ANC managing is the total destruction of the country's healthcare system. Maybe if the DA comes to power it will be something to entertain.

I would certainly have favoured Bernie over Trump if only Bernie wasn't sabotaged by the Dems. But he was, and they deserve to eat schit for their sins. Trump is the perfect punishment for a really rotten system, but frankly the more of his time he wastes on inane vulgar nonsense, the less time is left to screw over the rest of the planet through some impulsive bufoonery.

I think this is the second time in the election and presidency threads that we're in agreement... I enjoy the debate, so let's not get a trend going.

 

[Garson007]

So you're basically saying that the system, if properly run, should give out free healthcare to those who couldn't afford it any other way?

There should be a level of care the department of health can provide. Anything else requires private hospitalisation.

 

[konfab]

So you're basically saying that the system, if properly run, should give out free healthcare to those who couldn't afford it any other way?

Healthcare to what end?

To me there is a gaping gap between providing care and mitigating risk

I think a fantastic goal is to make primary care and dentistry available (I don't use the term free) for everyone to use at the cost of the state. That is a quality of life type of thing and is quite a realistic goal IMO. I would probably group in maternity clinics under that as well. Not a single person would disagree that this would improve the lives of everyone. People getting colds, sinusitis and that type of thing is a given of life and can directly be quite cheaply helped.

Mitigating risk from diseases is a whole other ball game. That is entirely based on an individual's needs and wants, thus a state imposed system will bankrupt itself though inefficiency. I would leave tertiary care and anything other than primary care up to the individual to insure for themselves. For example, if you know you will not engage in risky behaviour, you should have the freedom not to pay for potential HIV/Aids care. If you smoke for example, you should have to pay the price for your habit if you want to be looked after if you get lung cancer.
This is so complex and vast that only an individualised system would exactly be able to deal with everyone's needs.

Getting a disease or breaking a bone is most likely a random act thrown at us by nature. We don't expect the state to insure our cars, houses and property against nature beyond a very limited level (so during a catastrophic hurricane, the state should provide emergency housing).
Similar with crime. We don't expect the state to police every facet of our lives that might need protection from crime, it covers a minimum and we provide the rest through security, insurance and defense.

 

[The_Assimilator]

If you smoke for example, you should have to pay the price for your habit if you want to be looked after if you get lung cancer.

...

Getting a disease or breaking a bone is most likely a random act thrown at us by nature.

What about people who never smoke a cigarette in their lives and still get lung cancer?
What about people who are born with diseases that require them to have constant, expensive, specialised care to keep them alive, for their entire life?

This is so complex and vast that only an individualised system would exactly be able to deal with everyone's needs.

An individualised system would require a central database of everyone's health conditions, and the type of people that idolise the Second Amendment will never allow that because it's communism in some way. So, not gonna happen.

 

[Garson007]

What about people who never smoke a cigarette in their lives and still get lung cancer?
What about people who are born with diseases that require them to have constant, expensive, specialised care to keep them alive, for their entire life?

Life tends to happen. The government cannot insure you against reality.

 

[konfab]

What about people who never smoke a cigarette in their lives and still get lung cancer?
What about people who are born with diseases that require them to have constant, expensive, specialised care to keep them alive, for their entire life?

That is a risk, and you can assign a probabilistic value to it. If parents are worried that their kids will be born with a disease that requires the type of care you talked about, they can take out insurance whilst the kid is still in the uterus.

An individualised system would require a central database of everyone's health conditions, and the type of people that idolise the Second Amendment will never allow that because it's communism in some way. So, not gonna happen.

Nope. There is an individualised, decentralised system already in existence. It is called the free market.

You can even open up some space on the insurance side by having a voucher for the indignant, so they can purchase a bit of cover for something that worries them. And that is about it.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

Trump's Leaner White House Payroll Projected To Save Taxpayers $22 Million

24 staff for Michelle Obama? :erm:

If the White House payroll is a leading indicator of the president’s commitment to shrink government then voters have a reason to cheer. Projected four-year savings on the White House payroll could top $22 million. Savings come from President Trump’s refusal to take a salary as well as big reductions in other areas including the absence of czars, expensive “fellowships,” and spending on FLOTUS staff.

On Friday, the Trump administration released their annual report to Congress on White House Office Personnel. It includes the name, status, salary and position title of all 377 White House employees. (Search the recent Trump administration payroll data – and last two-years of the Obama administration – posted at OpenTheBooks.com.)

Here are some key findings:

There are 110 fewer employees on White House staff under Trump than under Obama at this point in their respective presidencies.
$5.1 million in payroll savings vs. the Obama FY2015 payroll. In 2017, the Trump payroll amounts to $35.8 million for 377 employees, while the Obama payroll amounted to $40.9 million for 476 employees (FY2015).
Nineteen fewer staffers are dedicated to The First Lady of the United States (FLOTUS). Currently, there are five staffers dedicated to Melania Trump vs. 24 staffers who served Michelle Obama (FY2009).
Counts of the “Assistants to the President” – the most trusted advisors to the president – are the same (22) in both first-year Trump and Obama administrations. In the Trump White House, Steven Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, Omarosa Manigault, Reince Priebus, Sean Spicer and 17 others make salaries of $179,700. In Obama’s first-year, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel and twenty others held the title with top pay of $172,000.
The highest compensated White House Trump staffer? Mark House, Senior Policy Advisor, has a salary of $187,500. Mr. House is “on detail” from a federal agency which allows him to exceed the top pay-grade of $179,700. In Obama’s Administration (2009), David Marcozzi earned $193,000 “on detail” from Health and Human Services.

Our review of the Trump White House payroll confirms five staffers dedicated to First Lady Melania Trump. Highly criticized for her twenty-four assistants, advisors, schedulers, directors, deputies, advance aides, associates, social and press secretaries and other helpers, former First Lady Michelle Obama’s staff was only slightly larger than Laura Bush’s staff of eighteen.

These five White House employees serving First Lady Melania Trump include:

Lindsay Reynolds, Chief of Staff to the First Lady ($179,700);
Stephanie Grisham, Director of Communications for the First Lady ($115,000);
Anna Niceta, Social Secretary ($115,000)
Timothy Tripepi, Deputy Chief of Staff of Operations for the First Lady ($115,000);
Mary-Kathryn Fisher, Deputy Director of Advance for the First Lady ($77,000).

...

While on the campaign trail, Donald Trump vowed to forego his paycheck. However, Article II of the United States Constitution mandates a presidential salary.
In the first quarter, President Trump donated his pay to the Dept. of Interior for construction and repair needs at military cemeteries.