Discussion:
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
(too old to reply)
Lynn McGuire
2018-09-22 22:54:08 UTC
Permalink
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/

A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.

The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback. The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses. The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles. All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.

The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour. Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.

The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA. In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war. Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.

There is a real squicky scene early in the book. A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience. That hit my squick factor big time.

My rating: 4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating: 3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)

Lynn
-dsr-
2018-09-23 11:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.

In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke without
doing something ridiculous like attempting to renegotiate the terms of
existing bonds or embargoing foreign trade.


-dsr-
J. Clarke
2018-09-23 13:57:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.

The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
Post by -dsr-
without
doing something ridiculous like attempting to renegotiate the terms of
existing bonds or embargoing foreign trade.
-dsr-
Lynn McGuire
2018-09-23 18:50:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...

How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.

Lynn
Kevrob
2018-09-24 01:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Count in spending by the 50 states and their constituent parts,
and govt spending as a total of annual GDP is ~ 35.8%, maybe
more, but not 45%.

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp

Kevin R
J. Clarke
2018-09-24 02:05:35 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>

Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>

Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>

Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<Loading Image...>

Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
Post by Lynn McGuire
Lynn
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-24 04:45:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-09-24 04:51:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Post by J. Clarke
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
I can think of a lot of state and city stuff that could use a good pruning.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Lynn McGuire
2018-09-24 05:08:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for Allâ„¢ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Post by J. Clarke
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
I can think of a lot of state and city stuff that could use a good pruning.
Me too including my local city of Sugar Land, Texas. Starting with the
city manager.

Lynn
J. Clarke
2018-09-24 05:15:13 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 00:08:22 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Ted Nolan <tednolan>
Post by J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Post by J. Clarke
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
I can think of a lot of state and city stuff that could use a good pruning.
Me too including my local city of Sugar Land, Texas. Starting with the
city manager.
Personally I don't think that we _need_ two guys who drive around all
day in a town-provided full size sedan measuring dandelions and
handing out tickets if one is over a foot tall.
J. Clarke
2018-09-24 05:13:54 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
Robert Carnegie
2018-09-24 09:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
Is it time to mention Hitler now?
Scott Lurndal
2018-09-24 13:31:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
The dickhead in chief, apparently.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-24 15:41:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
The radical right wing got Trump elected.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
J. Clarke
2018-09-24 23:18:51 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:41:42 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
The radical right wing got Trump elected.
Hillary managing the remarkable feat of stepping on her dick got Trump
elected. The "radical right" is a lunatic fringe. The people who
voted for Trump were working people who were worried more about their
jobs than about whether gay people could get married and the like.
Lynn McGuire
2018-09-25 00:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:41:42 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 21:45:21 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 13:50:18 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:09:21 -0400, -dsr-
Post by -dsr-
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of. I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
...
Post by Lynn McGuire
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security
full retirement age to 57. And, all illegal immigrants, current and
future, become citizens. And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
I thought you said it was a dystopia?
Post by Lynn McGuire
Those items
bankrupt the USA government by 2024. Then things get ugly as the states
start bankrupting also. By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
Ah, it's a paranoid fantasy. Got it. Useful review.
In the real world, the US Federal government can't go broke
And that is the problem with modern liberalism, you actually _believe_
that the government can't go broke.
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
...
How do you get to 45% of the GDP ? My understanding is more like 20 to
25% of the GDP.
Depends on which source you believe. Here's one that says 40%
<https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/percent_gdp>
Here's another that says 37.8 two years
ago.<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's another that says 41.6
<https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-spending-to-gdp>
Here's the one I was looking at and I admit to projecting the 2016
trend.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_States#/media/File:Total_government_spending_on_all_levels_(United_States).png>
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the
US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
The "radical right wing" is a lunatic fringe. Who cares what they
think?
The radical right wing got Trump elected.
Hillary managing the remarkable feat of stepping on her dick got Trump
elected. The "radical right" is a lunatic fringe. The people who
voted for Trump were working people who were worried more about their
jobs than about whether gay people could get married and the like.
+1

And it was not just Hillary. Obama got a lot of people upset with "you
did not create that" and "your jobs are never coming back from outside
the USA".

Lynn
David DeLaney
2018-09-28 11:57:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Hillary managing the remarkable feat of stepping on her dick got Trump
elected. The "radical right" is a lunatic fringe. The people who
voted for Trump were working people who were worried more about their
jobs than about whether gay people could get married and the like.
+1
And it was not just Hillary. Obama got a lot of people upset with "you
did not create that" and "your jobs are never coming back from outside
the USA".
The latter, at least, is -true-. Not without massive changes in what the
ordinary person can afford, and/or forcing workers to work in conditions that
would cause even most farmers apoplexy. The jobs went overseas because the
businesses the jobs are for could not afford to keep them here AND keep the
products' prices close to where they had been AND hire Americans for the jobs
with the concurrent need to follow American pay scales, safety regulations,
union rules, insurance offerings, etc.

That condenses to "the jobs you had at the factory ain't a-comin' back, not
the way you remember them, and not as for-life positions you can raise a
family on". Yeah, they're upset... but Trump CAN'T actually do anything about
it, no matter what he promised, so they were sold snake oil and con jobs.

Dave, also see "immigrant workers are taking our jobs!" "no they're not, you
wouldn't DO that job for anywhere near that pay rate." "but but but MUH JOBZ"
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Lynn McGuire
2018-10-01 17:35:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by J. Clarke
Hillary managing the remarkable feat of stepping on her dick got Trump
elected. The "radical right" is a lunatic fringe. The people who
voted for Trump were working people who were worried more about their
jobs than about whether gay people could get married and the like.
+1
And it was not just Hillary. Obama got a lot of people upset with "you
did not create that" and "your jobs are never coming back from outside
the USA".
The latter, at least, is -true-. Not without massive changes in what the
ordinary person can afford, and/or forcing workers to work in conditions that
would cause even most farmers apoplexy. The jobs went overseas because the
businesses the jobs are for could not afford to keep them here AND keep the
products' prices close to where they had been AND hire Americans for the jobs
with the concurrent need to follow American pay scales, safety regulations,
union rules, insurance offerings, etc.
That condenses to "the jobs you had at the factory ain't a-comin' back, not
the way you remember them, and not as for-life positions you can raise a
family on". Yeah, they're upset... but Trump CAN'T actually do anything about
it, no matter what he promised, so they were sold snake oil and con jobs.
Dave, also see "immigrant workers are taking our jobs!" "no they're not, you
wouldn't DO that job for anywhere near that pay rate." "but but but MUH JOBZ"
You sound like that weird guy who claimed he had an economics degree and
was using the library computers since he was jobless. Are you that guy ?

Lynn
David DeLaney
2018-10-09 09:32:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by David DeLaney
That condenses to "the jobs you had at the factory ain't a-comin' back, not
the way you remember them, and not as for-life positions you can raise a
family on". Yeah, they're upset... but Trump CAN'T actually do anything about
it, no matter what he promised, so they were sold snake oil and con jobs.
Dave, also see "immigrant workers are taking our jobs!" "no they're not, you
wouldn't DO that job for anywhere near that pay rate." "but but but MUH JOBZ"
You sound like that weird guy who claimed he had an economics degree and
was using the library computers since he was jobless. Are you that guy ?
...

...

"I don't wuv u any more." - little blue man

Dave, I am QUITE aware that I am not an expert in everything. At the same time,
I have had enough exposure through reading (and some doing) to lots of stuff
to have picked up basics, and/or to tell when people are blatantly ignoring
some existing facts because they dislike the ramifications thereof
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Scott Lurndal
2018-09-25 13:12:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 08:41:42 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
Post by Dimensional Traveler
The radical right wing got Trump elected.
Hillary managing the remarkable feat of stepping on her dick got Trump
elected. The "radical right" is a lunatic fringe.
Boloney. THe "radical right" starting with that fool salamander from Georgia
have been attacking the Clintons for a quarter century with falsehoods
and lies.
James Nicoll
2018-09-24 14:07:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
Nah, the nutters trim state governments, too. For that matter, Ontario
went baby eater in the last election and one of the first things the
new government did was massively slash the number of council members
in the Toronto government (mid election for max chaos) in revenge for
how poorly the new Premier's addled brother's term as deranged mayor
of Toronto went.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
David DeLaney
2018-09-28 11:49:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
Well, that's just because money spent by the Fed-uh-rel Gummit immediately
vanishes. Completely and mysteriously; it's never seen again. Nobody knows
where it goes, except "not back to us'ns who paid their damn taxes". As opposed
to city or county spending, which stays RIGHT THERE.

Dave, they're somewhat divided on state government spending, since so much of
it goes to those decadent cities teeming with no-goods
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-28 14:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Remember that the Federal government is not the only government in the US.
But it is the only government in the US that the radical right wing
hates and wants to "prune".
Well, that's just because money spent by the Fed-uh-rel Gummit immediately
vanishes. Completely and mysteriously; it's never seen again. Nobody knows
where it goes, except "not back to us'ns who paid their damn taxes". As opposed
to city or county spending, which stays RIGHT THERE.
Dave, they're somewhat divided on state government spending, since so much of
it goes to those decadent cities teeming with no-goods
You are forgetting the magical power of "States Rights". They're right
there in the document that makes all the states work together and be one
country.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
David DeLaney
2018-09-28 11:45:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
The government in 1900 spent 10% of the GDP. Today it spends 45
percent of the GDP. What happens when it startes spending more than
the GDP?
... are you ... actually suggesting here that the amount of money the
government takes in, and the amount it spends, have to have anything to do
with each other?

...no, my mistake. You're suggesting that the amount of money the government
spends, and the amount of money the entire country -- hold on, lemme get this
right -- the amount of money that the total of finished goods and services
produced by the entire country sums up to -- have to have anything to do with
each other.

What a strange idea. It's a lot like the bellhop's missing three dollars...

Dave, GDP is "total added value for the [time period]", basically
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Magewolf
2018-09-23 13:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years? Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt? And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
Robert Carnegie
2018-09-23 13:56:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years?
Fiat of the author.
Post by Magewolf
Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt?
"Stupider" is implied by the question.
Post by Magewolf
And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
People from other countries come to see. And to point
and to laugh.
J. Clarke
2018-09-23 14:02:01 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 06:56:17 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years?
Fiat of the author.
Post by Magewolf
Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt?
"Stupider" is implied by the question.
Post by Magewolf
And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
People from other countries come to see. And to point
and to laugh.
That would be tourism, not immigration.
Robert Carnegie
2018-09-23 14:06:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 06:56:17 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years?
Fiat of the author.
Post by Magewolf
Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt?
"Stupider" is implied by the question.
Post by Magewolf
And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
People from other countries come to see. And to point
and to laugh.
That would be tourism, not immigration.
"Tourists" are, and are counted as, immigrants.
J. Clarke
2018-09-23 16:19:56 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 06:56:17 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years?
Fiat of the author.
Post by Magewolf
Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt?
"Stupider" is implied by the question.
Post by Magewolf
And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
People from other countries come to see. And to point
and to laugh.
That would be tourism, not immigration.
"Tourists" are, and are counted as, immigrants.
In modern liberalism perhaps.

So when I nip up to Quebec the City for dinner I'm immigrating to
Canada?
Greg Goss
2018-09-23 16:42:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
That would be tourism, not immigration.
"Tourists" are, and are counted as, immigrants.
In modern liberalism perhaps.
So when I nip up to Quebec the City for dinner I'm immigrating to
Canada?
This is one reason why a wall is ineffective. So many "immigrants"
overstay a tourist visa.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
J. Clarke
2018-09-23 16:59:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
That would be tourism, not immigration.
"Tourists" are, and are counted as, immigrants.
In modern liberalism perhaps.
So when I nip up to Quebec the City for dinner I'm immigrating to
Canada?
This is one reason why a wall is ineffective. So many "immigrants"
overstay a tourist visa.
So how may "immigrants" do overstay a _TOURIST_ visa?

All visas are not tourist visas. It is my understanding that the
major overstayers are students.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
2018-09-23 21:16:59 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 12:59:44 -0400, J. Clarke
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Greg Goss
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 07:06:10 -0700 (PDT), Robert Carnegie
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by J. Clarke
That would be tourism, not immigration.
"Tourists" are, and are counted as, immigrants.
In modern liberalism perhaps.
So when I nip up to Quebec the City for dinner I'm immigrating to
Canada?
This is one reason why a wall is ineffective. So many "immigrants"
overstay a tourist visa.
So how may "immigrants" do overstay a _TOURIST_ visa?
All visas are not tourist visas. It is my understanding that the
major overstayers are students.
True, but plenty of people overstay tourist visas, too.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
My latest novel is Stone Unturned: A Legend of Ethshar.
See http://www.ethshar.com/StoneUnturned.shtml
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-23 17:45:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
   https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available in
ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback to
the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election. She
immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social Security full
retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants, current and future,
become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.  Those items bankrupt
the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly as the states start
bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third world country with
illegal immigrants pouring into the country from the Caliphate of
Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year old
boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug to
continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years?
Fiat of the author.
Post by Magewolf
Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt?
"Stupider" is implied by the question.
Post by Magewolf
And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
People from other countries come to see. And to point
and to laugh.
That's tourism, not immigration.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Lynn McGuire
2018-09-23 19:00:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
    https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available
in ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback
to the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social
Security full retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants,
current and future, become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
Those items bankrupt the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly
as the states start bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third
world country with illegal immigrants pouring into the country from
the Caliphate of Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year
old boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug
to continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big
time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years? Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt? And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.

Also, you did not read the other conditions. Lowering the Social
Security full retirement age from 67 to 57 means ten more years of SS
payments per person. Probably another trillion dollars per year.

Plus raising the minimum wage from $7.25/hour to $15/hour will cause
unemployment to go up by some factor. More unemployment payments.

More illegal immigrants becoming legal cause federal payments to go up
for food stamps, section 8 housing, health care, etc, etc, etc. More
federal expenses.

At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.

Lynn
J. Clarke
2018-09-24 02:29:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Magewolf
Post by Lynn McGuire
_Flashback_ by Dan Simmons
    https://www.amazon.com/Flashback-Dan-Simmons/dp/0316101982/
A standalone book about a dystopian USA, no prequel or sequel that I
know of.  I read the well printed and bound trade paperback of which I
bought at a bargain price version.
The book is about the USA set in 2034 when 87% of the population is
addicted to a drug called Flashback.  The flashback drug is available
in ten minute to twenty+ hour doses.  The protagonist, a former police
officer fired for his addiction, is living in a abandoned mall store
that has been turned into cubicles.  All he wants to do is flashback
to the good times with his dead wife.
The book has Hillary Clinton winning the 2016 presidential election.
She immediately enacts Medicare for All™ and lowers the Social
Security full retirement age to 57.  And, all illegal immigrants,
current and future, become citizens.  And a minimum wage of $15/hour.
Those items bankrupt the USA government by 2024.  Then things get ugly
as the states start bankrupting also.  By 2034, the USA is a third
world country with illegal immigrants pouring into the country from
the Caliphate of Europe, South America, etc.
The financial bankruptcy in 2024 causes a civil war in the USA.  In
fact, about a dozen civil wars and the secessions of several states.
China also fails and proceeds into a civil war.  Japan enters one side
of the Chinese civil war using mercenaries from the bankrupt USA.
There is a real squicky scene early in the book.  A group of 15 year
old boys kidnap a fellow student, rape her, and use the flashback drug
to continuously relive the experience.  That hit my squick factor big
time.
My rating:  4 out of 5 stars
Amazon rating:  3.2 out of 5 stars (291 reviews)
Lynn
How does enacting universal health care cause the US to go broke in 8
years? Is the US so much poorer and stupider then all the counties that
have it now and are not bankrupt? And if it is a third world hell hole
in 10 more years why is it getting waves of immigration?
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.

Some will say that it didn't happen that way in their favorite
workers' paradise. Their favorite workers' paradise is not the US,
don't assume that it will work the same way here. Most workers'
paradises don't have, for example, the concept of "minority" in the
context of a group to whom one shoult pay a premium in order to right
past wrongs.
Post by Lynn McGuire
Also, you did not read the other conditions. Lowering the Social
Security full retirement age from 67 to 57 means ten more years of SS
payments per person. Probably another trillion dollars per year.
If we assume everyone retires at 57 and they get the same average
payment as at present, about 340 billion. It's more complicated than
that but it's a ballpark.

Workforce 55-64 26,064,000 <https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat18b.htm>
Multiply by .8 to get 57-64 gives 20,851,200. Multiply by average
social security benefit (1360 * 12 = 13620) and you get
$340,291,584,000.00
Post by Lynn McGuire
Plus raising the minimum wage from $7.25/hour to $15/hour will cause
unemployment to go up by some factor. More unemployment payments.
Not clear on how that's going to work--fewer workers but the onew
working will be making more than twice the wage--from a tax viewpoint
it might be a wash. You only get unemployment if you've worked and
then only for a limited time.
Post by Lynn McGuire
More illegal immigrants becoming legal cause federal payments to go up
for food stamps, section 8 housing, health care, etc, etc, etc. More
federal expenses.
Or maybe they'll get betterr jobs. Being illegal does not mean being
incompetent.
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
And that's the real issue.
Michael F. Stemper
2018-09-25 14:20:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
Michael F. Stemper
Always use apostrophe's and "quotation marks" properly.
Kevrob
2018-09-25 15:16:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.

http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html

Kevin R
J. Clarke
2018-09-26 01:13:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Alan Baker
2018-09-26 01:35:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Where by "random blogger" you mean:

Professor of Social Economics Gary Becker

and Richard A. Posner, Judge, United States Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.

Just thought perhaps that should be pointed out as a rebuttal point to
your ad hominem.

:-)
Kevrob
2018-09-27 03:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Professor of Social Economics Gary Becker
... and 1992 Nobel Laureate in Economics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Becker#Nobel_Memorial_Prize

Which doesn't make him right, of course. They gave it to Krugman,
once. But both men are highly respected in their field.
Post by Alan Baker
and Richard A. Posner, Judge, United States Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.
Who ought to have gotten a seat on SCOTUS 20 years ago, but for
his penchant of writing about everything, making a feast for those
searching for "gotcha!" quotes to drum up opposition.

See:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/judge-richard-posner-retirement.html

I think I would have nominated Richard Epstein first, though.
Post by Alan Baker
Just thought perhaps that should be pointed out as a rebuttal point to
your ad hominem.
:-)
Having concentrated on politics and history in college, and
taken courses in economics basically just for the fun of learning
about it, I may have overestimated the fame of Becker and Posner
among some readers of the group. That one of them is either
incapable of doing a cursory web-search, or unwilling, is a bit
of a disappointment.

Kevin R
J. Clarke
2018-09-28 00:43:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Professor of Social Economics Gary Becker
... and 1992 Nobel Laureate in Economics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Becker#Nobel_Memorial_Prize
Which doesn't make him right, of course. They gave it to Krugman,
once. But both men are highly respected in their field.
Post by Alan Baker
and Richard A. Posner, Judge, United States Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.
Who ought to have gotten a seat on SCOTUS 20 years ago, but for
his penchant of writing about everything, making a feast for those
searching for "gotcha!" quotes to drum up opposition.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/judge-richard-posner-retirement.html
I think I would have nominated Richard Epstein first, though.
Post by Alan Baker
Just thought perhaps that should be pointed out as a rebuttal point to
your ad hominem.
:-)
Having concentrated on politics and history in college, and
taken courses in economics basically just for the fun of learning
about it, I may have overestimated the fame of Becker and Posner
among some readers of the group. That one of them is either
incapable of doing a cursory web-search, or unwilling, is a bit
of a disappointment.
If it's a blog I tune it out on general principle.
Robert Carnegie
2018-09-28 03:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Kevrob
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Professor of Social Economics Gary Becker
... and 1992 Nobel Laureate in Economics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Becker#Nobel_Memorial_Prize
Which doesn't make him right, of course. They gave it to Krugman,
once. But both men are highly respected in their field.
Post by Alan Baker
and Richard A. Posner, Judge, United States Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.
Who ought to have gotten a seat on SCOTUS 20 years ago, but for
his penchant of writing about everything, making a feast for those
searching for "gotcha!" quotes to drum up opposition.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/judge-richard-posner-retirement.html
I think I would have nominated Richard Epstein first, though.
Post by Alan Baker
Just thought perhaps that should be pointed out as a rebuttal point to
your ad hominem.
:-)
Having concentrated on politics and history in college, and
taken courses in economics basically just for the fun of learning
about it, I may have overestimated the fame of Becker and Posner
among some readers of the group. That one of them is either
incapable of doing a cursory web-search, or unwilling, is a bit
of a disappointment.
If it's a blog I tune it out on general principle.
Blogs aren't equal. I haven't opened this one
but I assume it isn't mainly about cats.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
2018-09-28 03:34:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 10:20:25 AM UTC-4, Michael F.
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Sun, 23 Sep 2018 14:00:57 -0500, Lynn McGuire
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4
trillion per year.
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of
that. That
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system. UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to
work for
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
Post by Lynn McGuire
free.
And given that the gummint seems to be unwilling to negotiate price on
much of anything and often buys from the high bidder because they are
small business, minority owned business, woman owned business or the
like, that 4 trillion is likely to increase when the gummint starts
paying for it.
Especially in light of things like the Senate's failure to pass the
Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007, which would
have allowed the gummint to negotiate said drug prices. Quite relevant
to health care costs, especially Medicare Part D.
--
There are arguments against governnment setting up a monopsony,
just as there are against supporting a monopoly.
http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2009/12/should-the-government-use-its-monopsony-power-to-reduce-the-price-of-drugs-posner.html
Post by Kevrob
Post by Kevrob
Post by Alan Baker
Post by J. Clarke
Some random blogger said it, it must be true.
Professor of Social Economics Gary Becker
... and 1992 Nobel Laureate in Economics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Becker#Nobel_Memorial_Prize
Which doesn't make him right, of course. They gave it to Krugman,
once. But both men are highly respected in their field.
Post by Alan Baker
and Richard A. Posner, Judge, United States Seventh Circuit Court of
Appeals and Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School.
Who ought to have gotten a seat on SCOTUS 20 years ago, but for
his penchant of writing about everything, making a feast for those
searching for "gotcha!" quotes to drum up opposition.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/11/us/politics/judge-richard-posner-retirement.html
Post by Kevrob
I think I would have nominated Richard Epstein first, though.
Post by Alan Baker
Just thought perhaps that should be pointed out as a rebuttal point to
your ad hominem.
:-)
Having concentrated on politics and history in college, and
taken courses in economics basically just for the fun of learning
about it, I may have overestimated the fame of Becker and Posner
among some readers of the group. That one of them is either
incapable of doing a cursory web-search, or unwilling, is a bit
of a disappointment.
If it's a blog I tune it out on general principle.
Blogs aren't equal. I haven't opened this one
but I assume it isn't mainly about cats.
It both is and isn't about cats until you look.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
David DeLaney
2018-09-28 12:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system.
... No.

If the "fed takes over" - which isn't how universal healthcare WORKS, it just
takes the feds setting list of prices THEY'LL pay for stuff, agreed on with
the _health care people_, not the pharmacies' demands - then all the
complications of "you HAVE TO get health INSURANCE with a -for-profit company-
that makes its profits and pays its salaries from its income, or else risk
going broke" go poof. Yes, that means the government now offers the equivalent
of insurance pools ... but it does NIT measn "you'll wait forever" or "you
won't get vital procedures". Rather, it means hospitals won't have to have
dozens of staff sorting out complications from which patients have which
insurance, and which items each insurance will pay for at what rates, SAVING
THEM MONEY in a distinctly large manner, and portions of the money spent WON'T
all drain into paying salaries and making profits for insurance companies by
default.

(Insurance companies will still exist. You'll be able to pay for policies for
cosmetic work, or for doctor access sooner for trivial stuff, etc. But they
will no longer be wagging the healthcare dog economy.)
Post by Lynn McGuire
UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
Also no. THEY are not where all the money is leaking out.
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
J. Clarke
2018-09-28 22:17:58 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:08:19 -0500, David DeLaney
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
Simple, medical spending in the USA is approaching $4 trillion per year.
The feddies and states are currently paying $1 trillion of that. That
means an increase of $3 trillion per year for the feddies when the
federal government takes over the entire medical system.
... No.
If the "fed takes over" - which isn't how universal healthcare WORKS, it just
takes the feds setting list of prices THEY'LL pay for stuff, agreed on with
the _health care people_, not the pharmacies' demands - then all the
complications of "you HAVE TO get health INSURANCE with a -for-profit company-
that makes its profits and pays its salaries from its income, or else risk
going broke" go poof. Yes, that means the government now offers the equivalent
of insurance pools ... but it does NIT measn "you'll wait forever" or "you
won't get vital procedures". Rather, it means hospitals won't have to have
dozens of staff sorting out complications from which patients have which
insurance, and which items each insurance will pay for at what rates, SAVING
THEM MONEY in a distinctly large manner, and portions of the money spent WON'T
all drain into paying salaries and making profits for insurance companies by
default.
(Insurance companies will still exist. You'll be able to pay for policies for
cosmetic work, or for doctor access sooner for trivial stuff, etc. But they
will no longer be wagging the healthcare dog economy.)
Post by Lynn McGuire
UNless, you
can get doctors and nurses and all of their support people to work for
free.
Also no. THEY are not where all the money is leaking out.
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
That's not "renegotiating the debt", that is approving a new bond
issue.

Renegotiating the debt is when you talk a creditor into taking ten
cents on the dollar because the alternative is that he and the other
creditors fight over your remains in court and maybe he gets nothing.
Post by David DeLaney
Dave
Greg Goss
2018-09-30 18:34:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
Those don't change the amount or terms of the debt. "Renegotiating a
debt" involves changing the contract retroactively. Something Trump
has done many times in his business career, which is why he needs the
Russian mafia instead of the NYC business community to finance him.
Mafia type organizations have their own ways of resisting such
renegotiation.

I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."

That's a renegotation.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-30 21:02:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
Those don't change the amount or terms of the debt. "Renegotiating a
debt" involves changing the contract retroactively. Something Trump
has done many times in his business career, which is why he needs the
Russian mafia instead of the NYC business community to finance him.
Mafia type organizations have their own ways of resisting such
renegotiation.
I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."
That's a renegotation.
Just out of curiosity, did you agree to that?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Greg Goss
2018-09-30 23:01:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Greg Goss
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
Those don't change the amount or terms of the debt. "Renegotiating a
debt" involves changing the contract retroactively. Something Trump
has done many times in his business career, which is why he needs the
Russian mafia instead of the NYC business community to finance him.
Mafia type organizations have their own ways of resisting such
renegotiation.
I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."
That's a renegotation.
Just out of curiosity, did you agree to that?
Yes. He later repaid the 15% on a personal basis. Getting 85% of my
three grand back was better than him going bankrupt.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-10-01 05:46:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Greg Goss
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
Those don't change the amount or terms of the debt. "Renegotiating a
debt" involves changing the contract retroactively. Something Trump
has done many times in his business career, which is why he needs the
Russian mafia instead of the NYC business community to finance him.
Mafia type organizations have their own ways of resisting such
renegotiation.
I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."
That's a renegotation.
Just out of curiosity, did you agree to that?
Yes. He later repaid the 15% on a personal basis. Getting 85% of my
three grand back was better than him going bankrupt.
Not necessarily. One of the benefits to creditors in a bankruptcy is
the court makes sure the debtor pays back as much as possible AND
there's no "agent" taking a cut out of what you're owed.

Thank you for answering.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Greg Goss
2018-10-01 10:03:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Greg Goss
Post by Dimensional Traveler
Post by Greg Goss
I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."
That's a renegotation.
Just out of curiosity, did you agree to that?
Yes. He later repaid the 15% on a personal basis. Getting 85% of my
three grand back was better than him going bankrupt.
Not necessarily. One of the benefits to creditors in a bankruptcy is
the court makes sure the debtor pays back as much as possible AND
there's no "agent" taking a cut out of what you're owed.
The guy had no real assets besides a nice stereo, an older car, an
employer pension and a fairly well-off mother.

I don't think that the creditors can get at his pension. His mother
might have bailed him out short of bankruptcy, but she might not have.

It took him a year to pay it off, so I was out a year's interest. He
repaid the 15% later on a voluntary basis, so I wasn't out the agent's
cut.

The other seven creditors were corporate entities who were owed less
than my $3K. I don't remember if a car lien was one of them.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.
Dimensional Traveler
2018-09-30 21:13:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Greg Goss
Post by David DeLaney
Post by Lynn McGuire
At some point the interest on the federal debt totally overwhelms the
income of the federal government. At that point, the federal debt must
be renegotiated or repudiated.
You seem to think we're not renegotiating the federal debt every year or two
NOW. What did you think "raising the debt ceiling" and the accompanying
henanigans were about, anyway?
Those don't change the amount or terms of the debt. "Renegotiating a
debt" involves changing the contract retroactively. Something Trump
has done many times in his business career, which is why he needs the
Russian mafia instead of the NYC business community to finance him.
Mafia type organizations have their own ways of resisting such
renegotiation.
I had a debtor in 2011 or so. An agency he signed up wiith made an
offer on his behalf. "He's willing to pay what he owes, but no further
interest. And we'll take 15% off the top of it. If all eight of his
major creditors don't agree to this, he would need to go bankrupt."
That's a renegotation.
Just out of curiosity, did you agree to that?
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Loading...