Vilageidiotx

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

I can't say much because I'm at work, but I can't say I appreciate the insinuation I'm a liar.

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

since posting evidence, or anything to prove my point is something I'm not suppose to do.

@SleepingSilence

Oh come on now, be more gracious then that, nobody wants to talk to a salty libertarian. Youtubers aren't evidence. The problem with editorials is that they don't represent evidence, they represent another person making an argument. Those people might have evidence or they might not, but in a discussion like this throwing a bunch of editorials around is debate by attrition, especially when all you have to do is spend ten minutes finding more articles to throw at me. I don't have time to pour over four different articles, each one put together over the course of a longer time, and then to refute each one. Use evidence to back up claims surely, but if you are going to link something you are responsible for breaking down how that evidence is relevant and applying it to the discussion yourself. That's just how these things are done. I could have threw links willy nilly too and not explained my position, but that's not fun. This is supposed to be a brain exercise, man! It's not good enough to believe in a thing and dote helplessly on a few pundits, you gotta explain the guts of these things yourself. It's my opinion that if you can't defend the guts of a position yourself then shouldn't be publically supportive of it.

I just think most people WANT socialized medicine because they here the word "Free Healthcare" and go OH BOY FREE STUFF! And it's not free...someone is paying for it.

The problem with this argument (besides aristocratic overtones of "The peasants ask too much") is that economics isn't a zero sum game. Privatization is a byword to mean commodification, that's what we are talking about, and some things make piss-poor commodities. We all generally accept, for instance, that defense would make a piss poor commodity. When things go on the market, they become subject to the avarice of the market. Healthcare makes a poor commodity (or one reason at least) because the purchaser of healthcare is in a poor position to bargain. If you have cancer, you can't exactly decline from purchasing care. There was a decency to the traditional small town doctor, a man who would have been ran out of town on a rail if he had tried to overcharge, but who's abilities and equipment were ultimately limited, and who could be subjected easily to the competition that makes capitalism "function". But that age ended with technology and what amounts to the need for expensive capital to be a doctor in the modern world. There was an inevitability that the private healthcare system, through the inability of the public to bargain for their health, and through the conflict between insurance and the hospitals for the former to avoid paying out and the later to take as much as they can, that the commodification of healthcare would do what it did in the United States.

And it seems a little cruel to start threatening our Canadians friends with privatization. People need to sleep at night.

also imo that blog looks pretty biased, but it's not wrong in some places

The front page had an article about privatizing money. I believe I said something earlier about Austrian school being something that serious economists poke fun at even more than they do Marx? Well, this website declares itself Canada's leading Austrian economics educators. I was going to refute the article but there wasn't really anything to grab onto, since it is pretty much just a dude pointing to a chart and saying "Look guys, its scary, this is so many costs guys."

I again think most people are fine with the system itself, but if you mean they don't like how said system is managed, then yes, I agree. The problem comes mostly with how understaffed it is. Specialists and appointments take fooorreeevvveerrrr. I can't imagine just being able to walk into a doctor's office and getting a check-up. Obviously the ER isn't like that, but the concept of going to the doctor when your minorly sick is unthinkable. You'd get over your illness by the time you get in. Do Americans actually go to the doctor when they have a cold or the flu? Can you actually get a doctor's note for school?

Old people will go to the emergency room for a flu. In my experience, people usually go to cheap walk-in clinics to get doctors notes, since they are usually equipped for exactly those sort of trifling things. I don't know anybody who ever went to a doctor for a cold. It's rather American to brag about going to work while having a cold or a flu anyway.

I think the stat came out to be an average of $4k a year for an adult?

@Sen

Imma go ahead and cut off at the pass any argument based on this and say that the US pays 8k per person for healthcare just in taxes. So that private system where we have to pay our bills and for insurance? That's also causing us to pay twice as much in taxes for healthcare than the Canadians do.

Insomnia, Anyone?

I love to sleep, just not at night. Nighttime is when everyone's online! It's when the stars come out and everything is dark and quiet! When I can sit anywhere in the house without worrying about light from the windows!

Also, sweet profile gif. I fucking love Rick and Morty.

@Obscene Symphony

Night is also the best time to drive. It's amazing. Once you get off the highway there is nobody on the roads, and everything is cool and quiet even in the summer.

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

But I'd take wait times over crippling debt if I need medical care any day.

@Sen

Here is a fun fact; my parents had to take a mortgage on their house to pay for my sister's surgery, and that was before Obama was president.

After all I don't think that opinion stats for a relatively unchanged system in Canada is going to mean much in nine-years. It's not like statistics for something like teen pregnancy where the percentages can change depending on how much you produce a constant and fresh Public Service campaign about it or how well you fund sex-education. Socialized healthcare would be for them something that's so fundamental the only immediate opinion changes might be whether or not its over or under-funded.

@Dinh AaronMk

That is what I was thinking. I picked this study because it was just that - a study, no frills or people trying to prove anything. I couldn't think of any good confounds between then and now that would make this study inapplicable. The Canadian system isn't new, so you couldn't explain good will in 2007 as just being the new car smell. The only two things that could possibly confound it is a conservative government that was in power in Canada between those times, and the fact that healthcare has become such a major conversation in America. But both of those things if they were to have any effect should make their system more popular, not less.

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

@Vilageidiotx Hmm...I wrote something...and it disappeared. (So best I got.) -.-
1. Not really
2. From 2007, and those stats offered really, really...don't mean anything.
3. I agree with healthcare system flawed, do not agree socialized care will help. (oh and since I promised. Wuff. <.<)

And you're all wrong! D:<

@SleepingSilence

This thing has died Down to the Point I Can post from my Phone. Basically, the 9 years that has passed has no reason to be a confounding issue in regards to what we are discussing.

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

<Snipped quote by Frizan>

You're wrong.

@TheEvanCat

no your wrong

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

@Vilageidiotx Well he also sites his sources. And you didn't answer my question about air line food? Dammit the hard hitting questions must be answered. :P

@SleepingSilence

yeh, but it's twenty minutes and you can't skim a video. plus i know i can't trust some young republican ray william johnson looking motherfucker.

Like I said, editorials are bad. Youtube is about as editorial as you can get. That's just one step above posting politically-charged memes. But if you like difficult links and want one that isn't editorial, lets try this.

A Report by the Canadian Government on public perceptions about healthcare.

I skimmed this. The pertinent bits are...

1: Canadians are against the idea of privatizing their healthcare, quite strongly opposed. 85% of Canadians asked thought that privatizing the Canadian system would change life in Canada, and 87% of those thing the change would be negative. That's roughly a quarter of Canadians polled who thinks that privatizing the healthcare system would be bad for Canada.

2: People don't like the waits times. This is the common complaint, and it's sensible. Like I said in the black/white discussion, I don't believe in perfect fixes, and I think everything is usually imperfect and can be made better. So obviously I don't think there are any absolutely perfect healthcare systems. I feel the need to point out the main reason those wait times don't exist in the United States is that Americans generally can't afford to be on the ball with their healthcare needs, even with insurance. We don't have lines because we can't afford to go to the hospital unless we have to. So whereas the wait in the socialized system is something that needs to be addressed, it's better than the inability to pay for access altogether.

As for airline food, I haven't flown for ten years and no matter how much I try, I can't find a fast food join that sells airplane food.

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

I have things to do as well. Precisely why will be a short responce. X3 Well i agree this thread is terrible and we already have two of them making it redundant. So, you have me there. xP

youtube.com/watch?v=q2jijuj1ysw Wuff. :D

(Pics or it didn't happen. :P)

I'll admit I'm being lazy, but as you said, got more things I'd rather do. ^3^ (i'm trying to show you snippets of the links to make it a little more than link spam) but I argue doing nothing is even lazier. :P

So how's about that air line food? Its crazy isn't it? :D

@SleepingSilence

dammit. videos are even worse. like, just looking at this guy i feel like more of an authority on the subject

what would you do if

i'd probably poop in the playpen

B!tchfest: a healthy release for our non-roleplay annoyances.

They're all out to lunch. And if it was 20 against one, it wouldn't be a discussion it be a circle jerk. They're enough echo chambers on the internet already. :P

@SleepingSilence

Right, but I got shit to do, I can't do everything myself. Plus you've misunderstood what I've said a few times and I would like to know if I'm really screwing the pooch so badly.

Even if I know you're not because I've yet to have about 6 ad hominem attacks against me. But it still makes me feel more like I'm just spamming the thread.

This thread's already shit so we ain't gonna make it worse.

2. The problem is, all it did was show how much worse socialized medicine can get. Failing, does not mean more people will want to try it again. (but even more extreme because Obama didn't go far enough.) Or something along those lines. I mean do we really want something like Canada's system? I could go deeper into...but I suppose if we must go on, I'd like to ask you before I say anything, do you think we should in a direction similar to Canada?

Yes, we do want something like Canada. It is rather rare to find people who like the old system even for how much Obama's isn't working. But first lets clear something up - we don't have socialized healthcare right now. What Obamacare is in its current form isn't socialized healthcare at all, except for the medicaid and medicare bits that were already in place. The main complaint about Obamacare, the almost universal complaint, is the price of health insurance. And that happened because the one thing Obamacare did in making it a requirement for insurance companies to accept people regardless of prior condition. Back in the old system, a person who wasn't healthy could be denied coverage and required to pay for healthcare out of pocket, and that was its biggest flaw, since the only way to get socialized healthcare was (and still is) to either be poor or be old. It reached the point that, before Obamacare, I just assumed my way of dealing with healthcare would have to be to join the growing trend of not purchasing health insurance and not paying my bills if I got sick (I knew assloads of people who handled it that way and they always seemed to come off rather well). That was a meaningful trend, and one of the practices signally that the insurance system wasn't sustainable.

That's why I say Obamacare has guaranteed we socialize. The thing people don't like (besides the prices) is how you get fined if you don't purchase a plan. If you got rid of the fine but still required companies to Insure people with prior conditions, the price of health insurance would skyrocket. The entire practice of insurance is rather medieval in that it's basically a company making a bet that you will pay more for the insurance than they will have to pay out, hence their unwillingness to bet on people who's existing conditions guarantee they will receive more money than they pay in. If they keep having to pay out for those people they wouldn't have accepted before Obamacare, it'll drive the price up. That was why the fine for not having insurance was put in place - so healthy people who normally wouldn't purchase a plan would be compelled by the government fine to pay for a plan and therefore balance out all those prior condition people who would otherwise make the insurance system untenable. What happened is that, by setting a fine instead of succeeding to pass a Public Option, Obamacare puts the Insurance companies in competition with the fine. All they have to do is make sure it is cheaper to get health insurance than get fined for not having it, and they'll keep raking in money from their captive consumer base. Whereas if the US had a public option, they'd have to compete with the usefulness of private insurance vs the cheap or free nature of the public option.

What Obama tried to do in his complete plan is the German version of health insurance, or at least that is how I have heard it explained in the past and I don't want to google it right now. Since it still involves private insurance and it is relatively less total, I can see it eventually becoming the Republican answer to Democrat cries for a completely public system. This especially works because, like I have said before, Republicans can't get rid of Obamacare. To do so would either require getting rid of fines and watching prices skyrocket, or actively tearing health insurance away from all those people with prior conditions who got insurance through Obamacare. And since illness knows no political party, a lot of the people who would be negatively effected by the repeal of Obamacare would be Republican voters. You also have to add to that the open question of whether or not prices would actually drop, and how many people once Obamacare was repealed would simply drop their health insurance altogether and thus cause a complication for the companies themselves.

So that's why I like the long-term effect of Obamacare despite dislking the cost of a plan under it. I like it when circumstances force the right to wander leftward on an issue. The dream situation for me would to see the right wing dragged as far to the left as where Sanders sits now before I die, so any work on that is going to impress me despite the short term annoyances involved.

3. No, I mean Reagan, was constantly falsely represented by saying he "invented the term" When it was a democratic term, made up to make him look stupid. It has never been actually used, in serious discussion besides misinformed people that don't know it has never existed or has ever legitimately been spoken.

A lot of things get lost in the wash. Like I said before, I've heard Republicans defend the term as if it were uttered by Reagan himself. Humanity is sometimes like a big game of telephone.

4. I will argue with the analogy because it's VERY wrong. Cap'N'Trade is a very legit excuse why government reach can go to far and make a problem much worse. Slavery existed before capitalism was even a f**king thing. So it's like comparing apples to orange poltergeists. (aka very unsimilar.) I'm posting links because instead of making up a random story about evil bigmart polluting in a lake. I want evidence to back up my case.

That's missing the forest for the trees though. Your still focusing too hard on the details of the analogy and not on what it actually means. I've explained it a few times and I don't want to have to write basically the same paragraphs over and over again each time I post.

And the idea that I'd have to post links to show that large companies pollute... how on earth would that have to happen? Do I need to post links to show the world is round?

5. I'm just going to stop you there, your argument (Reaganomics/trickle down) is completely for something THAT HAS NEVER EXISTED. It is satire you've believed as truth. Stop bringing it up like an actual thing, please.

You've posted links showing that the term itself is a joke. What it is used in modern parlance to make fun of though, supply side economics, does exist. It'd be like me saying Obamacare doesn't exist because the word itself was invented to make fun of Obama.

You told me, small businesses getting hurt with regulations was a myth. Or that high taxes don't hurt small businesses. It's almost common sense how wrong that is. Now you can argue, the damage is overblown? Or not as serious as the opposition lets on? Maybe...Now you're going to say, "well I don't agree" but you have nothing to prove those statements wrong so how can I even reply?

I said, and where this even started, is that the idea that large businesses support regulation and taxation to destroy small businesses is a myth because it doesn't make sense, and I outlined why several times. Again, you're misunderstanding what I am saying here. What I've argued for beyond that isn't that taxation or regulation does nothing to small business, but rather it is necessary to keep society honest.

Like that...Well doesn't help me much, not even saying where you work, or how much you make Approx. Makes it very hard to believe you.

Dammit, you aren't going play with this one. Okay, I work for the IRS.

And you want me to not provide facts and evidence...I don't think you should take things at face value and just "believe".

If you make an extraordinary claim, and you can't argue for its efficacy using general knowledge, then you can cite things, but that isn't the same as link-spamming. To cite something, you read it, break it down and present its information yourself in a way that fits the conversation, so that the link is more a formality. What I take exception to is listing a bunch of links and saying nothing about them so your reader has to go and read them all. I go into these things more like verbal discussions because that means I can write them stream of conscious and it doesn't take too much time. If you want to write yours like an essay with citations that's your choice, but don't just toss links at me and get mad when I didn't take an hour to read and dissect everything. I'd also argue that editorials and blogposts don't count as citations since you can find any number of those that support anything you could ever want.

I don't want to have a debate on Moby dick story, and have neither of us read any passage of the book...

i read the Wishbone version when i was a kid, but since it was a kids version i think they censored the dick

This is not exactly what I describe as fun. XD Well, my roommate's grandapa and someone like my one sister, a bleeding heart liberals, probably never voted replubican in their fuckin lives. And they both like and probably will vote trump...So, I don't exactly know what to say anymore.

I've voted in one Republican Primary and one Democratic primary in my life, and the two Presidential elections I've been old enough to vote in I've voted third party. Trump's popularity is wild. I'd never vote for the guy, but between him and Sanders, this election has been some of the best TV in recent memory. It's fun as hell watching everyone squirm. The one thing I can say about Trump is, he seems to be helping to make the right-wing disreputable. My father, a life-long Reagan Republican, dropped the party and promised never to vote again after that penis-debate.