• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

After private equity it's probably the profession most dressed up as honest and respectable but the most vampire-like, meant solely to funnel the productive capital from labor into management. I interviewed at one of these places out of college. The playbook is insanely simple. You go to a struggling company, interview management, put a Powerpoint together that says "reduce overhead" which means make working conditions worse/cut benefits or consider layoffs, collect your fee and rinse and repeat. It's putting a respectable face on doing the hard work at failing companies so management can say "we did everything we can after we ran our company into the ground."
 
 
Townie wants to eliminate private insurance and eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs, but is upset with buttigieg for his grunt work role in streamlining operations at bcbs michigan
 
After private equity it's probably the profession most dressed up as honest and respectable but the most vampire-like, meant solely to funnel the productive capital from labor into management. I interviewed at one of these places out of college. The playbook is insanely simple. You go to a struggling company, interview management, put a Powerpoint together that says "reduce overhead" which means make working conditions worse/cut benefits or consider layoffs, collect your fee and rinse and repeat. It's putting a respectable face on doing the hard work at failing companies so management can say "we did everything we can after we ran our company into the ground."

You got all that from your interview?
 
Townie wants to eliminate private insurance and eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs, but is upset with buttigieg for his grunt work role in streamlining operations at bcbs michigan

Correct. The for profit insurance industry should not exist, and the admin redundancy issue isn't as serious as Republicans suggest: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/09/single-payer-job-loss-bruenig

It should be alarming for anybody not fully given over to Pete that he went from "I support Medicare for all unabashedly" to "I support a path to Medicare for All/M4AWWI" to using Republican talking points about what implementing M4A would mean.
 
You got all that from your interview?

And from experience in industry and people I know who work in management consulting. It's a reductive explanation, often times they look at the financial accounting or suggest people on the business analysis side need to use different models when they build business cases, etc. On paper the job description is lending expertise, so if you're management and you've identified an area of functional weakness, you can bring in consultants to do on-job training, etc.

sometimes companies are struggling because they have bloated overhead, though

Often times, yes. There's bloat almost everywhere. Within publicly traded companies with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders, cutting that bloat is an important part of management's responsibility. But you won't find a McKinsey account man suggesting cutting exec salaries. They cut from the bottom up. It's no different at Deloitte or any other big firm, but McKinsey has managed to earn a reputation as especially nasty. There's a certain neolib appeal when Pete does it at nonprofit BCBS though, I get it!
 
Correct. The for profit insurance industry should not exist, and the admin redundancy issue isn't as serious as Republicans suggest: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/09/single-payer-job-loss-bruenig

It should be alarming for anybody not fully given over to Pete that he went from "I support Medicare for all unabashedly" to "I support a path to Medicare for All/M4AWWI" to using Republican talking points about what implementing M4A would mean.

What was M4A in Feb 2018? It was a vague concept. The actual bill didn’t come until after Pete was already running on his version of implementation.
 
What was M4A in Feb 2018? It was a vague concept. The actual bill didn’t come until after Pete was already running on his version of implementation.

You keep being dishonest about this.
 
You keep being dishonest about this.

Post some facts that contradict what I’m saying.

Your argument is that back in Feb 2019 when Pete was a long shot candidate nobody knew about he was getting massive wads of health insurance cash that convinced him to abandon M4A by being for it with a more gradual implementation.
 
Do your own research. There was a Medicare for All Act in 2017. Farther back, Conyers introduced a Medicare for All bill in 2003. It’s always meant single-payer. Pete has been quoted as understanding it meant single-payer and that he supported it. Now he doesn’t.
 
Do your own research. Pete favors single payer with a more gradual transition. You’re making a disingenuous argument. Is everybody else sticking exactly with the bills from 2003 and 2017?

Almost the entire Dem field is on board with single payer and you’re quibbling about how to get there.
 
I don’t know what to tell you. You keep sticking to an argument that is objectively wrong.
 
Let's play a game called "City Planning: Guy from Robocop 2 or Pete Buttiegieg?"

I'll say a quote and you tell me if it's from Pete Buttiegieg or the Old Man in Robocop 2.

1) My friends, welcome to our city as it should be, and as it will be in the hands of responsible private enterprise.
2) We have really tried to position ourselves as what we call a "beta city"
3) We're going to raise towers of glass and steel. Every citizen will have a living unit. Safe, secure and clean. Now please, take your seat.
4) You've got 100,000 residents in the case of our city, but also external stakeholders, visitors, businesses that we are trying to be in contact with, all of which are trying to take our time and attention.
5) Anyone can buy OCP's stock and own a piece of our city. What could be more democratic than that?
 
So, the obvious Robocop ones are 1, 3, and 5. The others, which are completely milquetoast, are Pete.

This is getting sad, boys. And it's so fucking weird.
 
You guys demanding the end of private insurance and the scaring of the public miss the obvious point. If there is a universally available, robust public option to buy into Medicare, that it will quickly devastate private insurance and dramatically lower RX prices on its own.

The PO (with RX coverage) will easily be 25% under private insurance costs. But the 25% is not the operable number. To buy the private insurance, companies would actually be paying 33% more than for the PO. How will publicly traded companies justify completely wasting tens of millions of dollars (and probably more) to their shareholders? Plus, they will be less for spending more.

Don't be dogmatic about words or theories. Results are what count.
 
Let's play a game called "City Planning: Guy from Robocop 2 or Pete Buttiegieg?"

I'll say a quote and you tell me if it's from Pete Buttiegieg or the Old Man in Robocop 2.

1) My friends, welcome to our city as it should be, and as it will be in the hands of responsible private enterprise.
2) We have really tried to position ourselves as what we call a "beta city"
3) We're going to raise towers of glass and steel. Every citizen will have a living unit. Safe, secure and clean. Now please, take your seat.
4) You've got 100,000 residents in the case of our city, but also external stakeholders, visitors, businesses that we are trying to be in contact with, all of which are trying to take our time and attention.
5) Anyone can buy OCP's stock and own a piece of our city. What could be more democratic than that?

frightening how the rise of Pete has brought out the anti intellectualism and anti-expertise vibe from the young left
 
if not for his views, past record, and proposed policies, why do you think young leftists oppose Pete?
 
Back
Top