Jump to content

**President Trump 2018 Thread**


Brian

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Let's be honest, all of the same people who 20 years ago were calling things "relationships between consenting adults" are perfectly willing to dig into the Stormy/Trump thing for political gain.

It absolutely has to do with the letter after the name

I think both should be impeached for lying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/17/2018 at 2:11 PM, southsider2k5 said:

Since you chose to provide no data beyond this, I looked on my own and discovered that 1.4 million Americans went abroad for medical care in 2016, apparently according to the same organization you referenced. 5 out for every 1 in is a net outflow, not a net inflow. Further, only 63,000 Canadians engaged in healthcare tourism in 2016, so any way you slice it, the original claim of:

On 5/17/2018 at 9:17 AM, raBBit said:

There's also a reason that people from adjacent countries that have socialized medicine come to America for procedures.

Doesn't stand up to fact based scrutiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump pressured the Postmaster General to double Amazons rates. She had to tell him they are bound by contracts and even if they wanted to change them , there is a review process. Then she had to show him how Amazon is actually beneficial to the USPS.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You were just complaining about corporations having too much power...so you want to take away the right of consumers to sue AND simultaneously not allow the government regulate them?

Aren’t you simply enabling them to become more powerful?   More monopolies and oligopolies who conspire to limit choice while raising profit margins?

What limits on corporations/profit/greed should be there?   NONE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, raBBit said:

First off, your link didn't discover that at all. Your link projected that. Unfortunately, it's your reading comprehension that "doesn't stand up to fact based scrutiny." 

So condescending for being so wrong. You claim to be a CPA, so you should know that projections are based on past known data and are meant to be as accurate as possible, accounting for things such as expected growth rate. So it's reasonable to assume that if 1.4 million were projected, something in the neighborhood of 1.4 million went. In fact, that organization later went on to say that 1.3 million Americans went abroad for medical care in 2016. And yes, that's an estimated figure, but you know as well as I do that actual accurate figures on this sort of thing are not going to be available and that reasonable estimates and approximations are used in all things business. If you want to be unreasonable and accept neither a projection or an estimate, you can choose to, but we both know that makes you unreasonable, since I'm sure you've certified audited financials that make use of reasonable estimates.

16 hours ago, raBBit said:

Furthermore, the third paragraph says "In addition to traveling in order to save money, some medical tourists plan trips because they want to have a treatment that’s not approved in the United States or because they’ll have a shorter wait by going abroad." Yesterday, I was asked why Americans would go to Europe for procedures, I said it was because of... "Regulation. FDA doesn't allow certain procedures." So your article is backing my point. I went on to say it's great that we have global options for our healthcare. I am in no way opposed of American's using every option they have medically or cosmetically. I am all for free will whether it's local or international. 

If you read that article, the first listed, and therefore likely the most commonly given, reason is reduced cost. Even the sentence you quoted says "In addition to traveling in order to save money...", meaning that the article is recognizing your reason as secondary to cost savings. In fact, every article I encounter on the subject lists cost as the first or primary reason for medical tourism, with seeking treatments that are illegal here typically listed as a secondary or tertiary reason. 

16 hours ago, raBBit said:

However, let's pretend your mischaracterized and baseless argument was true (which it isn't, as you say, "anyway you cut it"). Statistics alone don't provide any clear cut evidence on a subject that is very nuanced on account of our economic climate being so hyper litigious and over regulated and with our society being the way it is. But regardless, if you're going to try and use statistics to try and confirm your beliefs, at least understand the absolute basics of statistics.  America has ~340 million people and we are the most advanced culture in the world. Canada has ~35 million people and ~20% of them live in the Artic circle. Comparing any outcome on an aggregate basis (as opposed to rate or per capita basis) when the population sizes aren't even slightly comparable in size or demographic is absolutely ridiculous.

Okay, so let's take the lower number for the US. Using your numbers above and the numbers from the articles, we have 0.38% of the US population traveling for health care in 2016 vs. 0.18% of the Canadian population. In other words, US medical tourism more than doubles Canadian medical tourism by percentage of population. Again, the numbers don't add up in favor of your argument.

16 hours ago, raBBit said:

Your use of statistics here applied to baseball: Adam Engel has 68 hits in 2017 & 2018. Adam Eaton Eaton has 37 hits in 2017 & 2018. Therefore, Adam Engel is the better hitter. 

It's not that hard to convert raw numbers to percentages. I even did it for you above. I don't understand why you are trying so very hard to not see the obvious conclusion the numbers are giving you, that's typically the opposite of how accountants work. In any case, here's a graphic showing Canada as the top medical tourism destination in the world:

MTA_1359_INFOGRAPH.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

https://apnews.com/a3521859cf8d4c199cb9a8567abd2b71

 

Quote

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — After a year spent carefully cultivating two princes from the Arabian Peninsula, Elliott Broidy, a top fundraiser for President Donald Trump, thought he was finally close to nailing more than $1 billion in business.

He had ingratiated himself with crown princes from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who were seeking to alter U.S. foreign policy and punish Qatar, an archrival in the Gulf that he dubbed “the snake.”

To do that, the California businessman had helped spearhead a secret campaign to influence the White House and Congress, flooding Washington with political donations.

Broidy and his business partner, Lebanese-American George Nader, pitched themselves to the crown princes as a backchannel to the White House, passing the princes’ praise — and messaging — straight to the president’s ears.

Now, in December 2017, Broidy was ready to be rewarded for all his hard work.

It was time to cash in.

In return for pushing anti-Qatar policies at the highest levels of America’s government, Broidy and Nader expected huge consulting contracts from Saudi Arabia and the UAE, according to an Associated Press investigation based on interviews with more than two dozen people and hundreds of pages of leaked emails between the two men. The emails reviewed by the AP included work summaries and contracting documents and proposals.

The AP has previously reported that Broidy and Nader sought to get an anti-Qatar bill through Congress while obscuring the source of the money behind their influence campaign. A new cache of emails obtained by the AP reveals an ambitious, secretive lobbying effort to isolate Qatar and undermine the Pentagon’s longstanding relationship with the Gulf country.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Cohen and this Broidy sleaze (gave $1 million in kickbacks to officials connected to the NY Lottery in return for tens of millions in consulting/financial management fees) namedrop more than Farmer and Michael Milken when he’s on the Sox radio broadcast pushing for prostate cancer donations...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Brian said:

They erased a small part of my ST Legacy. :(

the new forums software took away the subtitle feature so the "b. hussein obama must be stopped" is lost to time, and it's really what made this thread title imo

 

 

e: the auto-embeded image it chose is perfect lmao

Edited by StrangeSox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CNN and AP barred from Pruitt EPA speech. EPA is now saying "limited space". For all the talk about guns and the Constitution, they have no problem making a mockery out of that document.

 

And they are so worried about leaks. Trumps own people are leaking the information. None of them trusts anyone else. It's a paranoid existence.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...