Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hadn't until I watched the video earlier and I commented on why I dismiss him. You or no one else commented on my comment.
He said that if someone needed an x-ray or a recliner they would purchase the recliner. That is weak and based upon stupid stereotypes. I didn't bother looking up more recent numbers as this will work. In 2012 the average American spent $9596 on health care. That is a lot of recliners.
As I admit to, that was the only thing I've heard him say but based upon that and what others are saying he is one of those people who get off on demonizing people he sees as less than himself.
You base this on a minute bit of information because someone said.
Again he hasn't been outdone yet. But how would you know since you haven't researched it and you base it on a soundbite of all things. LMAO Basing something on a soundbite is childish.
I admitted that it was all I know of him but I addressed what he said. Until someone shows where I am wrong, I have no reason to go any further.
You based it in a soundbite. Substance matters. Your posts in this thread lack substance.
People have to jump through hoops for healthcare while when buying a recliner, one can just walk in with no problems. Easy enough. That is an educated guess.
You based it in a soundbite. Substance matters. Your posts in this thread lack substance.
People have to jump through hoops for healthcare while when buying a recliner, one can just walk in with no problems. Easy enough. That is an educated guess.
Id like to see a link to what you heard please.
That wasn't his argument. I am the one that wants to end people having to jump through hoops to acquire health care. His argument is that people would buy a recliner over getting a needed x-ray. Never mind that the x-ray may cost many times more than the recliner but I posted where on average people spent nearly $10,000 a year on health care. (and that was 6 years ago).
So he is wrong. Explain to me why he is not. Just because no one in his audience was willing to counter him does not mean it was a valid point.
I based my argument on the video I was supplied to watch.
That wasn't his argument. I am the one that wants to end people having to jump through hoops to acquire health care. His argument is that people would buy a recliner over getting a needed x-ray. Never mind that the x-ray may cost many times more than the recliner but I posted where on average people spent nearly $10,000 a year on health care. (and that was 6 years ago).
So he is wrong. Explain to me what he is not. Just because no one in his audience was willing to counter him does not mean it was a valid point.
Shapiro = "medical care is a commodity, and that in life, we are often faced with commodities we cannot afford."
Healthcare is not a right.
"Morally, you have no right to demand medical care of me. I may recognize your necessity and offer charity; my friends and I may choose to band together and fund your medical care. But your necessity does not change the basic math: Medical care is a service and a good provided by a third party. No matter how much I need bread, I do not have a right to steal your wallet or hold up the local bakery to obtain it. Theft may end up being my least immoral choice under the circumstances, but that does not make it a moral choice, or suggest that I have not violated your rights in pursuing my own needs."
"Because medical care is a commodity, and treating it otherwise is foolhardy. To make a commodity cheaper and better, two elements are necessary: profit incentive and freedom of labor. The government destroys both of these elements in the health-care industry. It decides medical reimbursement rates for millions of Americans, particularly poor Americans; this, in turn, creates an incentive for doctors not to take government-sponsored health insurance. It regulates how doctors deal with patients, the sorts of training doctors must undergo, and the sorts of insurance they must maintain; all of this convinces fewer Americans to become doctors. Undersupply of doctors generally and of doctors who will accept insurance specifically, along with overdemand stimulated by government-driven health-insurance coverage, leads to mass shortages. The result is an overreliance on emergency care, costs for which are distributed among government, hospitals, and insurance payers."
Shapiro = "medical care is a commodity, and that in life, we are often faced with commodities we cannot afford."
Healthcare is not a right.
Irrelevant. It's what a decent society should strive for.
A single mother of two working as a waitress finds a lump in her breast. I want her to be able to see to her health care needs for her, her kids and for society.
Shapiro is saying, go buy a recliner and beg. Granted both sides abuse this argument and I condemn both sides for it. Whether it's a "right" or not is a distraction to avoid the real issues. It's what a decent country should see we do.
No, charity can not cover the health care of the country. Solutions that are not solutions are worthless. Does the government at times make it more expensive than it needs to be? They do and we need to address it all.
Then produce for yourself. Excess production or non-needs based production (Maslow’s hierarchy) can be used for yourself, the difference from capitalism is that you can’t use the labor of others to create self-gain. You are limited by your own abilities.
Then produce for yourself. Excess production or non-needs based production (Maslow’s hierarchy) can be used for yourself, the difference from capitalism is that you can’t use the labor of others to create self-gain. You are limited by your own abilities.
That's the theory BUT it is NOT how it works in our "capitalistic" society. Where does tariffs fit in? Where do bail outs fit in? Where does things like QE fit it?
Can you provide some evidence to support this claim?
Sure, I’m not going to go searching his entire Twitter page again but whenever two people he doesn’t like are in a debate he uses terms like Iran-Iraq war redux saying he wishes both sides would be destroyed in the process (despite one side invading the other with the help of his favorite president). He went more in depth once saying how the world would have been better if both sides were destroyed, etc.
Even in dumb circumstances like pop culture debates I’ve seen him mention it as a joke. It’s not a joke to me.
That's the theory BUT it is NOT how it works in our "capitalistic" society. Where does tariffs fit in? Where do bail outs fit in? Where does things like QE fit it?
I’m not describing a capitalist society, I’m describing a Marxist-anarchist society where production resources are public.
I agree with you on capitalism, the feedback loop makes sure people with the money are the ones who make the most money creating concentrations of private power beyond the ability of one individual. And then when you bring in the state, they command or influence the economy to benefit the major centers of powers arguing they help people through employment; then the workers are permanently split from the controllers (the capitalists) and the feedback loop works in reverse (with help from the state).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
