I used to be disgusted, and now I try to be amused.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Plus, I don't think those are English. Looks more like those swarthy Mediterranean cukes.

Today's Daily Dose is some more instrumental funky ass funk from the Nite-Liters. Special funk bonus -- a gong! This one goes out to Hank. It's "Horny Man":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_52wNXcrb0

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Tim Duy: "We don’t have answers for these communities. Rural and semi-rural economic development is hard. Those regions have received only negative shocks for decades; the positive shocks have accrued to the urban regions. Of course, Trump doesn’t have any answers either. But he at least pretends to care."

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tim Duy: "We don’t have answers for these communities. Rural and semi-rural economic development is hard. Those regions have received only negative shocks for decades; the positive shocks have accrued to the urban regions. Of course, Trump doesn’t have any answers either. But he at least pretends to care."

Except that this isn't really true: "If we simply fall back on our standard numbers, we lose."

This election was decided by a combined 70k or so votes in Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina, all states with new voting restrictions. Which means, very small amounts of voter suppression likely made the difference in this election.

We can respond to that by emulating Trump or by trying to get slightly better turnout in the cities in these states next time around (among other options). I know which I prefer.

And the fact of the matter is we do have an answer for these people: move.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Tim Duy: "We don’t have answers for these communities. Rural and semi-rural economic development is hard. Those regions have received only negative shocks for decades; the positive shocks have accrued to the urban regions. Of course, Trump doesn’t have any answers either. But he at least pretends to care."

The most successful rural jobs program of the last couple decades is ACA. Hospitals are among the largest employers in most rural areas, and total healthcare employment increased about 25% over the last 8 years (not all due to ACA of course, but, still, that's a real healthy sector for employment).

The Rs are going to get to figure out their options now:

(1) Repeal the parts of ACA they don't like (that is, the revenue raisers), keep the parts they like (the expenses), and figure out how to fund the resulting deficit on both the state and federal level, and with the losses of coverage that result (e.g., "Repeal and Replace", also known as "Damned if you Do");

(2) Repeal ACA as a whole, deal with the job loss and the care loss, try to blame someone else (e.g., their usual approach);

(3) Keep ACA around, maybe even try the modest reforms that are really needed to keep it on track, and deal with their base. Enjoy those pitchforks, white dudes - at least you're covered! Of course, they don't view this as an option.

Good luck!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

Except that this isn't really true: "If we simply fall back on our standard numbers, we lose."

This election was decided by a combined 70k or so votes in Wisconsin, Michigan and North Carolina, all states with new voting restrictions. Which means, very small amounts of voter suppression likely made the difference in this election.

We can respond to that by emulating Trump or by trying to get slightly better turnout in the cities in these states next time around (among other options). I know which I prefer.

And the fact of the matter is we do have an answer for these people: move.

Trying running on the "don't have a job? move!" platform, and see how well that works.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The most successful rural jobs program of the last couple decades is ACA. Hospitals are among the largest employers in most rural areas, and total healthcare employment increased about 25% over the last 8 years (not all due to ACA of course, but, still, that's a real healthy sector for employment).

Agree that health-care jobs are growing. Not sure how much of that is due to the ACA, since health-care's share of the economy was growing anyway, but it surely doesn't hurt employment to expand coverage. Also not sure that these jobs are in rural areas. In my experience, health-care jobs tend to cluster in larger population centers, which service large rural areas around them. For example, in Eastern South Dakota, the health-care jobs are going to cluster in Sioux Falls, where people go to get health-care. From your perspective, that may be creating rural jobs, but I don't think people who live in Eastern South Dakota will see it that way.

[ferrets_bueller]

And the fact of the matter is we do have an answer for these people: move.[/QUOTE]

Good advice to desert dwellers and unemployed miners alike.

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/s...2&action=click

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Trying running on the "don't have a job? move!" platform, and see how well that works.

My political activity started and ended with involvement in a neighborhood association board, where I was able to make a surprising number of enemies advocating for what I thought were fair outcomes with respect to issues I had no personal stake in whatsoever. Today's Daily Dose is a slow burning groove from Cymande. Mighty Heavy Load:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQRkAoV96vo

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Agree that health-care jobs are growing. Not sure how much of that is due to the ACA, since health-care's share of the economy was growing anyway, but it surely doesn't hurt employment to expand coverage. Also not sure that these jobs are in rural areas. In my experience, health-care jobs tend to cluster in larger population centers, which service large rural areas around them. For example, in Eastern South Dakota, the health-care jobs are going to cluster in Sioux Falls, where people go to get health-care. From your perspective, that may be creating rural jobs, but I don't think people who live in Eastern South Dakota will see it that way.

I think you'll find that health care is more evenly spread by congressional district around the country than any other major industry. It may cluster within a CD around the largest facilities, but even then it will spread out, so if there are 10% more covered lives in Wood Chipper, North Dakota, you may need another doctor to move out there and every few doctors may need another nurse or receptionist, even if all the specialists they send to are in Fargo. And it disproportionately helps places with high uninsureds, which is going to mean rural America (perhaps less so in states that opted out of medicaid expansion).

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I think you'll find that health care is more evenly spread by congressional district around the country than any other major industry. It may cluster within a CD around the largest facilities, but even then it will spread out, so if there are 10% more covered lives in Wood Chipper, North Dakota, you may need another doctor to move out there and every few doctors may need another nurse or receptionist, even if all the specialists they send to are in Fargo. And it disproportionately helps places with high uninsureds, which is going to mean rural America (perhaps less so in states that opted out of medicaid expansion).

Uh, here, we make people drive.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Uh, here, we make people drive.

That'll weed out the deplorables....

Don't any of the regionals open up clinics or outpatient facilities out in the styx? It may not provide them with life saving emergency service, but it could attract some nice and profitable day surgery or maybe keep the out of date but fully paid up radiology equipment busy.

You guys also turned down the medicaid expansion money, right?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I think you'll find that health care is more evenly spread by congressional district around the country than any other major industry.

Maybe so, but to continue with my prior example, South Dakota is a single congressional district.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

That'll weed out the deplorables....

Don't any of the regionals open up clinics or outpatient facilities out in the styx? It may not provide them with life saving emergency service, but it could attract some nice and profitable day surgery or maybe keep the out of date but fully paid up radiology equipment busy.

You guys also turned down the medicaid expansion money, right?

Isn't it pretty to think so? Atticus or Penske?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Maybe so, but to continue with my prior example, South Dakota is a single congressional district.

You seem to think you are arguing with me.

My point was that healthcare is a significant industry in every congressional district, including the most rural, and that this seems relevant to Rs concerned with jobs.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

You seem to think you are arguing with me.

My point was that healthcare is a significant industry in every congressional district, including the most rural, and that this seems relevant to Rs concerned with jobs.

You said, "The most successful rural jobs program of the last couple decades is ACA." I'm still not buying that health care jobs are rural jobs. If your point is that they're not, but we haven't done anything for rural jobs better than the ACA, point taken.