Comments by "PM" (@pm71241) on "The Rubin Report" channel.

  1. Great ... so, let charity handle stuff you can't figure out how to handle and let financial institutions get between the patient and the doctor to profit. yeah...That'll work. <sarcasm/>
    80
  2. So ... let's assume for the moment that Scott is correct and Trump is just a genius. Then why does he nominate all these blistering incompetent idiots who just happen to have conflicts of interest? Why do we need a climate science denier as chief of NASA?
    74
  3. So we don't need to agree about facts? ... we'll just each go our own way !?!? I have a strange feeling that that assumes we can somehow magically isolate any consequence of any ones behavior to their own little instance of planet Earth.
    55
  4. Wow ... Glenn Beck really surprised me here. He even managed to tell Dave that he at some point have to stop given the Trumpists the benefit of the doubt and say NO. Dave. ... take his final advice here. You have to stop making excuses for the Trump administration and the republicans supporting him in the same way and with the same conviction as you/we reject the SJW authoritarianism and regressive nonsense.
    51
  5. This whole argument of "forcing" people to provide you health care is completely absurd. In a single payer system like Denmark the hospital doctors are in the government pay role. It's their job. It's just as absurd as saying that the goverment is "forcing" the police officer to pull you over.
    46
  6. What he says about Sweden not being a "socialist" country is an important fact - and the same goes for Denmark. All the "right wing" nonsense about Bernie Sanders, socialism and the scare tactics about "Venezuela" is completely nonsense. The difference between Denmark and Sweden is that in Denmark we've actually had the conversation during the last 30 years. Not always without smearing and prejudice, but we've had the conversation.
    45
  7. There's a reason why people don't read newspapers. Every time I read an article about a subject I know something about, I can't help thinking: ... what if all the articles about stuff I don't know anything about are equally full of nonsense?
    40
  8. Ha... Ted Cruz may want libertarians to support him, ... but he's still an authoritarian. Why would they?
    33
  9. Oh great.... another climate science denier ... ... yeah yeah... we should listen to all opinions and let them play out in the "open marketplace of ideas" ... However: 1) The open marketplace for ideas when it comes to scientific questions is THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE. - not some stupid ideologue on Youtube. 2) ... There are only 24 hours in a day... there's a limit to how much time one can spend listening to people who have already demonstrated that they a) happily speak about stuff they don't understand, b) are perfectly willing to let ideology supersede reason and objectivity when it suits their purpose. ... the Rubin Report has taken a de-route. Sad... it started out promising with Sam Harris, Michael Shermer and similar. But lately it's gone increasing into ga-ga land. One right-wing science denying nut-case after the other.
    30
  10. That will not happen. And Potholer54 has already explained why. He (and others) have no reason to believe that Steven Crowder has any interest in objectivity. That makes a conversation completely useless, since any fallacious BS can be thrown without any chance of fact-checking. (Crowder has already demonstrated this as his MO). Basically ... it makes it way too easy to exploit Brandolinis law. So Potholer54 has offered a written(recorded) back and forth where each part document sources and arguments with references and where replying allows time for scrutiny of claims wrt. sources. Crowder has ignored this offer, - most likely since he knows that will not let him get away with his superficial but catchy talking-points.
    29
  11. Well... I'm with Sam Harris here and not with Gad Saad. Trump is a fact-free dangerous buffoon. So, sue me...
    29
  12. Danes can't even agree internally what it means to be "Danish". The other day the right wing nationalist party said it involved going to church at christmas and easter. If that's the level of conversation they are going to have they can - to be brief - fuck off. What matters is not whether you are "Danish" or who defines what that means. What matters is that you believe secular liberal values like freedom of speech, gender equality, equality under the law and democracy.
    27
  13. Argh... I'm a classical liberal. I fully agree that classical liberalism should be based on reason, but I'm sooooo... frustrated by the number of Climate Science deniers speaking for classical liberalism. Also here. Mark Pellegrino seems to be another example. Michael Shermer was the exception.... But then... he also works professionally with debunking science denial.
    26
  14. Unfortunately... it's not only religion which can lead to lack of rationality and science denial. Dogmatic political ideological beliefs can too.
    26
  15. yeah... when you understand which argument Shermer is trying to explain to him, it's clear nearly every single time Prager doesn't get the point - *at all*. Also ... I have to puke every time I hear a climate science denier brag about how he's guided by a primary desire to "be good". - while actively contributing to the single thing which threatens the existence of human civilization the most.
    24
  16. ... Well... Richard Dawkins once said: “It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that).” I guess the same goes for people with John Stossels approach to global warming.
    19
  17. No one is forced to take a government job as a doctor and anyone can quit when they want. You are building myths.
    17
  18. Bernie doesn't point to Scandinavian countries as "socialist meccas". He points to them as countries which have been influenced by social democrat policies. ... which is simply a fact. Varying social democrat governments in Denmark, Norway and Sweden have played a huge role in shaping society during last century. But they haven't been alone about it... The classical liberals (and the conservatives) have had government power too (on and off).
    13
  19. If only the west hadn't alienated the Persians in 1952... They would have been a so much more civilized partner.
    13
  20. Thank you Dave, - Amen .... oops... You know what I mean.
    13
  21. That's a different question. That's about any government function. - and ultimately whether or not you think there should be a government at all. I happen to believe we need a government to protect the basic liberty values. However, as a Georgist, I would prefer that the funding came from rent of natural opportunities - in other words funds created not by individuals but by the entire society in the first place.
    12
  22. If Dave thinks Bernie was talking about "rattling the system the same way", then he doesn't get a single word of what Frum just said.
    12
  23. +PasOdMater "there are actually two sides in this anti-regressive movement. " Exactly ... For secular liberals to reject the regressive tendencies of the rest of the left, should not send us in bed with the anti-science conservatives. ... even though we might agree about that SJW and the regressive left are a problem.
    12
  24. But still ... doesn't that require a judge to rule that it was in fact libel ? Is Twitter now our judge?
    11
  25. "The opposite of faith is certainty" ... hmm... interesting "definition" of faith. Dawkins defines "faith" as: Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence. Personally I think the latter definition is less vague.
    11
  26. But that's an argument for anarchy. If the premise is that we have already decided to not have anarchy and a government is needed, then the issue becomes "what should the government do and why?" ... and if there's a rationale for the government providing a certain society function, then it is totally irrelevant to people living in that society that that is enforced. You are of course always welcome to leave...
    11
  27. I call bullshit on that... This is supposed to be about basing ones approach on reason and much of this discussion is premised on denial of scientific facts... Don't you think people would be critical if it had been an interview about someone having a political opinion on space exploration premised on flat earth believe?
    10
  28. So the guy claiming to have a show based on "reason and logic" dismisses the scientific fact that wild-fires increase with global warming as "political" ... and tries to make the physical explanation for the statistics of natural disasters about "tolerance". Sure... when facts gets annoying a little ad-hominem is always easier.
    10
  29. I have a prediction ... None of the people who will now attack Dave for this interview will address the factual quality of the content with actual arguments showing where it might be wrong.
    10
  30. No Dave ... you won't get away from the two-party system before you do away with the electoral college and winner-takes all elections. Such a system gravitates towards two-party systems.
    10
  31. No no no no... you are not telling the whole story about the Microsoft Internet Explorer. The problem was not that they gave it away for free. The problem was that they deliberately made it behave in a non-interoperable way to use their windows monopoly to drive the other browsers out of the market. That's not free market forces working. Monopoly markets are not free markets.
    10
  32. What? ..Ted Cruz? ... Where?
    10
  33. ... except one crucial thing: Evidence. The theist would claim people are ignorant about the evidence for God, but is never really able to produce any. There's plenty of evidence for evolution - and man made global warming. And let's give Stossel the benefit of the doubt and say he's just ignorant about it - even though that clearly doesn't prevent him from inventing his own facts and keep ranting about it.
    10
  34. ... waiting for Dave to get you on. Thanks for making me laugh at the exorcism of internalized misogyny.
    9
  35. No ... it's fine that Dave doesn't insert himself.... but I would appreciate if he took the approach to guest who he knew would say controversial things about science that he made it a "3-way" with a dialog between two people... so there was some way to allow for objections to prevent the whole thing to be premised on a lie about the science.
    9
  36. His description of Trump vs. Bernies position about "trade" is insanely simplistic. Just because you call it a "Free Trade Agreement" doesn't mean it IS actually free trade. There's a lot more to these than a free trade. For instance... when TransCanada sues the US over KeystoneXL at a NAFTA court manned by corporate lawyers as judges... That's not "Free Trade". That's moving power from democracy to corporatism/oligarchy.
    9
  37. Livid ... Anarcho-capitalism is as much a utopian fantasy as communism. Libertarianism in general is not. ... Actually... My experience with geo-libertarians is that once people have seen the light they stay committed the rest of their lives. - as Thomas Paine.
    9
  38. yeah ... that kinda goes without saying, doesn't it?
    9
  39. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you are not responsible for your statements. Many western democracies have punishments for statements which, either: * Threatens other people with violence. * Propagate lies about other persons. More specifically. In a country like Denmark, you will actually be punished for - say advocating genocide, or falsely spreading the rumor that someone is a pedophile. (the latter not being a criminal offense)
    9
  40. > And Pakman is a far-left Marxist. You obviously have never met a far-left Marxist.
    9
  41. I find the idea of anarchy rather naive... and I find calling that opinion for "thuggery" silly. Liberty is about some basic principles: 1) You own your self and you body. 2) You have the right to the fruit of your own labor. 3) Your personal freedom extends exactly so far as to not infringe on the equal freedom of others. A couple of observations here: * Natural opportunities (like land) are not the fruit of anyones labor and monopolizing them if limited requires compensation to others. * An unregulated marked is not necessarily a free market. There are plenty of ways a non-regulated marked can lock it self into a position where the market forces don't work anymore. Externalities are one. * Someone has to enforce that no one violates principle 3. As a Geo-libertarian, I believe that principle is valid across generations. We have no right to steel from our kids. Liberty is not achievable in an anarchy... And there are plenty of funds to fund the government which doesn't violate principle 2.
    9
  42. Actually ... no it's not. John Stossel claimed there were 4 parts to it: 1) Climate is changing... Actually he put up a Red Herring, but the evidence is overwhelming that it is and that it's not just business as usual. 2) Is it humans: Yes - the evidence is overwhelming. And no - it was not "warming" long before humans. That's a completely meaningless statement. 3) Is it a crisis ... Regardless of all the other problems and the conflicts they will spur, I'd say it's pretty indisputable that meters of sea level rise will be a real crisis for our civilization. 4) Can we do anything about it?: ... We can probably not reverse much, but The evidence is (again) overwhelming that if we don't stop making it worse it will get worse... much worse.
    9
  43. Sorry Dave ... I cannot do that... :) "Old School Conservatives" and "Old School liberals" were actually very much opposed. Go read up on the hatred between people like Edmund Burke And Thomas Paine. And the Trump stuff... I'm sorry, but it seems like a bunch of naive nonsense... Come on Dave... you preach "reason", but fail to see the long series of individually disqualifying actions Trump has already taken which literally defies reason. ... like .. just to take an example... nominating Ben Carson for a cabinet-position??? ... Who do you think you are kidding? Not even Ben Carson thought that was a "reasonable" pick.
    8
  44. The problem is that many libertarians and especially anarcho-capitalist have a very superficial idea of what falls under the NAP and which violations can actually be resolved so the victim is fully reimbursed. ... and I say that as a libertarian.
    8
  45. I don't think Bernie is pushed by the regressive left. Tulsi Gabbard is certainly not. She has not than any spoken out against the "Voldemort effect" (as Maajid Nawaz call it.) And Bernie has been very critical of the role of Saudi Arabia. I've pretty convinced he can think for him self.
    8
  46. I must admit ... I've followed a lot of these atheist channels, but those using vulgar language (like "The Amazing Atheist") have never interested me. Let me recommend "Potholer54". Btw... Dave... there's a subject if you look for a "sciency" guy to interview. Peter Hadfield / "Potholer54"
    8
  47. Wow! ... I was this close to actually opening a Twitter account. ... but Anita Sarkeesian? ... I've got better things to do than being exposed to that kind of censorship.
    8
  48. A cult ... Hmm... I just don't get what she contributes of value which we couldn't already get from better thinkers before.
    8
  49. Strange how the Internet seems to make everywhere else more enlightened, but make the West less enlightened. http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/scientists-earth-endangered-by-new-strain-of-fact-resistant-humans ... now back to the cat movies.
    8
  50. Alex Epstein is of course perfectly aware that eugenics is a social philosophy and not a scientific theory.
    8