MAGAThread XIII: The Summit of Putin

[Kramanica]

What exactly has he done that's so bad? He's achieved 4.1% economic growth which was supposed to be impossible, held a historic summit with Kim Jong-un that was also supposed to be impossible, got his tax cuts passed, increased military spending, etc.

So what's he done that was so bad?

Not be hillary.
Or a liberal.
Or a democrat.

True.

[Sick Jumps]

Okay, I'll be over here, in reality

What exactly has he done that's so bad? He's achieved 4.1% economic growth which was supposed to be impossible, held a historic summit with Kim Jong-un that was also supposed to be impossible, got his tax cuts passed, increased military spending, etc.

So what's he done that was so bad?

4.1% annual growth in a quarter isn't impossible. Obama hit 5.2% once.

What people have commented on is 4% growth over a year, so over 4 quarters. Growth is expected to cool off in the next two quarters. Trump wants to aim for 3% which is ambitious. Keep in mind that he's achieving this with a large, debt-fueled fiscal stimulus at the top of the business cycle.

I'm not impressed with the summit yet. It's amounted to a political stunt at this point. I am hopeful that the continuing negotiations will go well, though.

[Sick Jumps]

Not be hillary.
Or a liberal.
Or a democrat.

True.

I don't mind a lot of the policy coming out of the White House as much as most people (though I do have reservations about certain things). I'm not diametrically opposed to everything he does.

The thing I dislike most about him is the lack of respect for political norms and the constant lying. The best thing he could do for himself would be to learn how to shut his cornhole.

[Valrifell]

Okay, I'll be over here, in reality

What exactly has he done that's so bad? He's achieved 4.1% economic growth which was supposed to be impossible, held a historic summit with Kim Jong-un that was also supposed to be impossible, got his tax cuts passed, increased military spending, etc.

So what's he done that was so bad?

Come now, the economic growth is largely out of the control of the sitting president and I dont think Trump helped it all that much. Besides, that metric you're using is only one way to test economic strength. North Korea was a flop that only legitimized a rogue state, but he did it I guess.

Dont fall into the stupid narritave that Trump has done the impossible, meetings with North Korea and rapid economic growth have been accomplished before or could have been easily accomplished before. Besides, the Pentagon is practically burning money unchecked and unregulated as they've done for decades, he's cut funding to science and art programs, and he's set to remove healthcare coverage from millions and raise the deficit through his tax cuts.

I dont know what you were expecting when you asked that question, but I do have legitimate grievances and you're overhyping the President.

[Petrasylvania]

What exactly has he done that's so bad? He's achieved 4.1% economic growth which was supposed to be impossible, held a historic summit with Kim Jong-un that was also supposed to be impossible, got his tax cuts passed, increased military spending, etc.

So what's he done that was so bad?

Come now, the economic growth is largely out of the control of the sitting president and I dont think Trump helped it all that much. Besides, that metric you're using is only one way to test economic strength. North Korea was a flop that only legitimized a rogue state, but he did it I guess.

Dont fall into the stupid narritave that Trump has done the impossible, meetings with North Korea and rapid economic growth have been accomplished before or could have been easily accomplished before. Besides, the Pentagon is practically burning money unchecked and unregulated as they've done for decades, he's cut funding to science and art programs, and he's set to remove healthcare coverage from millions and raise the deficit through his tax cuts.

I dont know what you were expecting when you asked that question, but I do have legitimate grievances and you're overhyping the President.

Hyping Trump's accomplishments and competence is a symptom of salt addiction.

[Kramanica]

What exactly has he done that's so bad? He's achieved 4.1% economic growth which was supposed to be impossible, held a historic summit with Kim Jong-un that was also supposed to be impossible, got his tax cuts passed, increased military spending, etc.

So what's he done that was so bad?

Come now, the economic growth is largely out of the control of the sitting president and I dont think Trump helped it all that much. Besides, that metric you're using is only one way to test economic strength. North Korea was a flop that only legitimized a rogue state, but he did it I guess.

So I assume Obama doesn't get credit for the economic recovery then.

All right. I can roll with that.

Dont fall into the stupid narritave that Trump has done the impossible, meetings with North Korea and rapid economic growth have been accomplished before or could have been easily accomplished before.

Meeting with Kim Jong-un could have easily been done before?

Besides, the Pentagon is practically burning money unchecked and unregulated as they've done for decades, he's cut funding to science and art programs, and he's set to remove healthcare coverage from millions and raise the deficit through his tax cuts.

>set to remove healthcare coverage from millions

How though

I dont know what you were expecting when you asked that question, but I do have legitimate grievances and you're overhyping the President.

Sure.

[Sick Jumps]

If Obama made a face to face meeting with Kim Jong Un a priority, it could have been done. The question is, what could he have realistically accomplished as a result of meeting him?

What do you think people like Sean Hannity would be saying if Obama did that, by the way? Would they be singing his praises?

[Petrasylvania]

If Obama made a face to face meeting Kim Jong Un a priority, it could have been done. The question is, what could have he realistically accomplished as a result of meeting him?

What do you think people like Sean Hannity would be saying if Obama did that, by the way? Would they be singing his praises?

They would be bitching that Obama had done what Donnie did exactly, putting on a hyped pageant and surrendered real concessions to Kim in exchange for jack shit feefees.

[Corrian]

If Obama made a face to face with meeting Kim Jong Un a priority, it could have been done. The question is, what could he have realistically accomplished as a result of meeting him?

What do you think people like Sean Hannity would be saying if Obama did that, by the way? Would they be singing his praises?

No they wouldn't be, because Trump has done plenty of things Obama supposedly did that was terrible and nobody bats an eye now.

[Sovaal]

If Obama made a face to face with meeting Kim Jong Un a priority, it could have been done. The question is, what could he have realistically accomplished as a result of meeting him?

What do you think people like Sean Hannity would be saying if Obama did that, by the way? Would they be singing his praises?

No they wouldn't be, because Trump has done plenty of things Obama supposedly did that was terrible and nobody bats an eye now.

Partisanship is a hell of a drug.

[Petrasylvania]

If Obama made a face to face with meeting Kim Jong Un a priority, it could have been done. The question is, what could he have realistically accomplished as a result of meeting him?

What do you think people like Sean Hannity would be saying if Obama did that, by the way? Would they be singing his praises?

No they wouldn't be, because Trump has done plenty of things Obama supposedly did that was terrible and nobody bats an eye now.

If Donnie literally proposed reintroducing a federal insurance mandate in the vein of the Heritage Foundation and Mitt Romney they would herald it as the greatest healthcare reform ever because it doesn't have nigger cooties.

[Galloism]

No they wouldn't be, because Trump has done plenty of things Obama supposedly did that was terrible and nobody bats an eye now.

If Donnie literally proposed reintroducing a federal insurance mandate in the vein of the Heritage Foundation and Mitt Romney they would herald it as the greatest healthcare reform ever because it doesn't have nigger cooties.

Careful what you wish for.

[Telconi]

Come now, the economic growth is largely out of the control of the sitting president and I dont think Trump helped it all that much. Besides, that metric you're using is only one way to test economic strength. North Korea was a flop that only legitimized a rogue state, but he did it I guess.

So I assume Obama doesn't get credit for the economic recovery then.

All right. I can roll with that.

Dont fall into the stupid narritave that Trump has done the impossible, meetings with North Korea and rapid economic growth have been accomplished before or could have been easily accomplished before.

Meeting with Kim Jong-un could have easily been done before?

Besides, the Pentagon is practically burning money unchecked and unregulated as they've done for decades, he's cut funding to science and art programs, and he's set to remove healthcare coverage from millions and raise the deficit through his tax cuts.

>set to remove healthcare coverage from millions

How though

I dont know what you were expecting when you asked that question, but I do have legitimate grievances and you're overhyping the President.

Sure.

>Healthcare

All I got was an eviction notice and an appointment in bankruptcy court.

[Kramanica]

No they wouldn't be, because Trump has done plenty of things Obama supposedly did that was terrible and nobody bats an eye now.

If Donnie literally proposed reintroducing a federal insurance mandate in the vein of the Heritage Foundation and Mitt Romney they would herald it as the greatest healthcare reform ever because it doesn't have nigger cooties.

Ha, oh right. That's the excuse used now for why the ACA sucked ass.

[Petrasylvania]

If Donnie literally proposed reintroducing a federal insurance mandate in the vein of the Heritage Foundation and Mitt Romney they would herald it as the greatest healthcare reform ever because it doesn't have nigger cooties.

Ha, oh right. That's the excuse used now for why the ACA sucked ass.

And nothing to do with Republican states rejecting the Medicare expansion to say FUCKOBAMA.

[Sick Jumps]

Part of why it sucked was that it was actively sabotaged by several states and now by the Feds.

Trump should try to offer a viable alternative that is palatable to both sides, because the rising cost of healthcare is a very important economic issue for the country.

[Kramanica]

Ha, oh right. That's the excuse used now for why the ACA sucked ass.

And nothing to do with Republican states rejecting the Medicare expansion to say FUCKOBAMA.

And nothing to do with this.

[Sick Jumps]

And nothing to do with Republican states rejecting the Medicare expansion to say FUCKOBAMA.

And nothing to do with this.

... because of the changes the GOP made.

I posted a study recently which showed that premiums would have likely declined if they made no changes to the law.

[Telconi]

Part of why it sucked was that it was actively sabotaged by several states and now by the Feds.

Trump should try to offer a viable alternative that is palatable to both sides, because the rising cost of healthcare is a very important economic issue for the country.

Any federal bill that relies on willing cooperation from hostile state governments sucks by definition.

Having said that, the ACA fucked for other reasons, I have probably one of the worse anecdotes about it, and I'm from a state that worshipped the ground Obama spat on.

Lastly, why? What reason does he have to find a compromise? And is there even one?

[Petrasylvania]

And nothing to do with Republican states rejecting the Medicare expansion to say FUCKOBAMA.

And nothing to do with this.

The increase is being driven in large part because people will no longer be penalized for not having insurance, as of 2019. Congress eliminated the penalty associated with Obamacare's individual mandate as part of its tax reform package last year.
This change alone will cause premiums to be 10% higher because fewer healthy people will buy coverage, leaving insurers with a sicker and costlier group of policyholders, the CBO projected.

Reading comprehension.

[Sick Jumps]

Part of why it sucked was that it was actively sabotaged by several states and now by the Feds.

Trump should try to offer a viable alternative that is palatable to both sides, because the rising cost of healthcare is a very important economic issue for the country.

Any federal bill that relies on willing cooperation from hostile state governments sucks by definition.

Having said that, the ACA fucked for other reasons, I have probably one of the worse anecdotes about it, and I'm from a state that worshipped the ground Obama spat on.

Lastly, why? What reason does he have to find a compromise? And is there even one?

I think it would have been possible to craft a bipartisan health bill. Maybe I give our Congressmen too much credit. Trump himself sort of wanted to do something like that (he publicly vacillated a few times), but GOP congressional leadership insisted on a Republican-only approach.

The ACA also did have flaws. It's not perfect by any means. The government shouldn't be deliberately sabotaging it, though.

[Kramanica]

And nothing to do with this.

... because of the changes the GOP made.

I posted a study recently which showed that premiums would have likely declined if they made no changes to the law.

It was literally already rising before that though.

[Kramanica]

And nothing to do with this.

The increase is being driven in large part because people will no longer be penalized for not having insurance, as of 2019. Congress eliminated the penalty associated with Obamacare's individual mandate as part of its tax reform package last year.
This change alone will cause premiums to be 10% higher because fewer healthy people will buy coverage, leaving insurers with a sicker and costlier group of policyholders, the CBO projected.

Reading comprehension.

Did Republicans do that back in 2013 also?

[Telconi]

Any federal bill that relies on willing cooperation from hostile state governments sucks by definition.

Having said that, the ACA fucked for other reasons, I have probably one of the worse anecdotes about it, and I'm from a state that worshipped the ground Obama spat on.

Lastly, why? What reason does he have to find a compromise? And is there even one?

I think it would have been possible to craft a bipartisan health bill. Maybe I give our Congressmen too much credit. Trump himself sort of wanted to do something like that (he publicly vacillated a few times), but GOP congressional leadership insisted on a Republican-only approach.

The ACA also did have flaws. It's not perfect by any means. The government shouldn't be deliberately sabotaging it, though.

The parties want very different things when it comes to healthcare. Shoot, people within those parties want even more varied things. I don't see a reason, nor a way, to create a bipartisan solution.

-shrug- What the government should or shouldn't do is debatable, we have giant buildings dedicated to those debates even.

[Petrasylvania]

Reading comprehension.

Did Republicans do that back in 2013 also?

Ah, literacy.

So the RNC’s numbers are sound. But we’ll also point out some missing context: The rate of increase between 2008 and 2013 was significantly lower than it was between 1999 and 2008.

From 2008 to 2013, premiums rose by an average of 5.8 percent per year. But between 1999 and 2008, premiums rose by an average of 13.2 percent a year -- in other words, twice as fast as premiums rose under Obama.

So, contrary to the tweet’s implication that Obama has presided over runaway health care costs, premiums are actually increasing less quickly than previously.

How much does that context undercut the tweet? That’s a matter of opinion.

Jon Gruber, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor who advised both Obama and then-Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney on health care policy, said that the RNC’s fact "is right, but that is actually good news, not bad news."

Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, agreed that it’s a reasonable bit of context. He acknowledged there are "differences of opinion" on why premiums are growing more slowly, including larger economic trends, long-term trends in health care and policies instituted under Obama’s law.

However, Gail Wilensky, who headed Medicare and Medicaid under President George H.W. Bush, cautioned against placing too much weight on the historical trends.

"Premiums rose," she said. "The most relevant point is that Obama and his advisers repeatedly and publicly said premiums would fall by the end of his first term if the ACA was passed. Instead, they rose."

Indeed, we have previously given Obama a Promise Broken for his pledge to "cut the cost of a typical family's premium by up to $2,500 a year."

Wilensky added that Obama may ultimately have been lucky in his timing.

"Health care prices has been increasing unusually slowly for the last few years," she said. "How much of that is carry-over from the deep recession is unknown." Whether or not premiums grow more slowly over the long term, she said, will become clearer once the economy recovers more fully and puts upward pressure on prices.

Our ruling

The RNC said "the average family premium has increased by 29% under Obama!" The leading study confirms that rise, which occurred over the course of five years. If you calculate the increases on an annual basis, premiums have risen by about 5.8 percent a year under Obama, which is less than half of the average annual rise during the nine years before Obama took office. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.