trans pacfic partnership

[dmp]

You seem to have pretty strong opinions about one side being the bad guy here.

Well, hopefully the brewery is accepting of diverse opinions. It is always nice to stick to the facts, but of course the facts that one pick's can show one's stripes.
I won't weigh in on the ACA in this thread since it is off-topic, but that would be a great topic to hash out the facts on. Reading the latest SCOTUS decision on it would be a good place to start. A really nice summary of what the law is, rather than how it has been portrayed by pundits.

 

[JohnRoberts]

You seem to have pretty strong opinions about one side being the bad guy here.

Well, hopefully the brewery is accepting of diverse opinions. It is always nice to stick to the facts, but of course the facts that one pick's can show one's stripes.
I won't weigh in on the ACA in this thread since it is off-topic, but that would be a great topic to hash out the facts on. Reading the latest SCOTUS decision on it would be a good place to start. A really nice summary of what the law is, rather than how it has been portrayed by pundits.

Your opinions are always welcome. Communities can fall subject to group-think if only discussing issues with people who already agree with them. I see that all the time in social media affinity groups.

One of the minority opinion Supreme Court justices (Scalia)  pejoratively called it  "SCOTUS CARE"  ;D. Good to see they can still have  a sense of humor.

I try to remain optimistic but we do have some serious challenges ahead.

JR

 

[dmp]

I found the arguments of John Robert's more persuasive the Scalia. And Scalia's attempts to be funny come across as unprofessional and disappointing in a Supreme Court decision imo, even if they do make good soundbites for the pundits.
It is interesting to read the actual decision, rather than the soundbites, if you haven't yet.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I found the arguments of John Robert's more persuasive the Scalia. And Scalia's attempts to be funny come across as unprofessional and disappointing in a Supreme Court decision imo, even if they do make good soundbites for the pundits.
It is interesting to read the actual decision, rather than the soundbites, if you haven't yet.

I read an excerpt from the Scalia argument (without the humor) and it seems sensible. I think I understand where Roberts is coming from and don't disagree completely, while it is not literally what they are supposed to do. That behavior seems epidemic in modern US government. 

Not the right thread for this... We'll be hearing more about reforming the ACA through the legislature now that this chapter is closed.  More than a slight chance that 2016 will be a referendum for ACA reform  so lots more discussion to come.

=======

Back on topic the trade adjustment bill and the African trade bill have passed both houses so are ready to sign if they haven't been already... The unions are not happy with the trans pacific partnership so they are not done fighting (any trade agreement still needs to be ratified by congress). We'll see how this goes.

The fast-track authority is good for 10 years so the next president or two will also have that available. 

JR

PS: Funny when I first read your post I thought you might be making a kind comment about my arguments, but after thinking about it, and how Justice Roberts voted,  I think I figured out your likely intent.