Comments by "romanmir01" (@romanmir01) on "Thousands Dead of Food Poisoning - What Will FDA Do?" video.

3000 dead? It's 1000 of 1%. FDA should be completely disbanded, it should be killed off, it shouldn't exist.
1
You are full of shit. Regulations -> terrible economic outcome and corruption. Regulations -> reduced choices, increased prices. Regulations -> outflow of capital and thus of jobs and destruction of economy. Regulations -> growth of gov't and destruction of individual liberties. that's all you are going to get. --- Your ideas have been tried and failed every single time. USSR, former communist China, communist Cuba, communist Somalia, North Korea, etc.etc.
1
Everything you said only happens when gov't interferes with the market. If a company is profitable, it sends a signal to other individuals that this business is profitable. Apple for example, is a profitable company, and everybody is trying to emulate them in every way, cutting into their profits. AFAIC they have peaked and will be in a slow decline as competitors arise. Only gov't can create monopolies that cannot be competed with because of laws, taxes, licenses and such.
1
It's a short hand, you are left with ad-hominems, your line of argument is obvious: "you are lunatic, thus you are wrong". As I said, it's the last refuge of the incompetent and the irrelevant. Enjoy it.
1
What's your point? Do you know what communism really is? It's unattainable by people on purpose, that's what it is. It's unattainable by people because it requires a change of a person into something that a person is not - a worker bee. As a person born in the former USSR, who lived there for too long, I can attest to the fact that not only it's not possible to change people into anything BETTER, but it shouldn't even be attempted, because the result is a change for the WORSE.
1
Profit motive is the MOST MORAL ENGINE of society, progress, economy, because profit motive does not discriminate, it does not steal under the guise of fairness. Profit motivates people to START BUSINESSES and it's businesses that HELP PEOPLE to live better lives, not gov't. Gov't only steals to give to somebody, a business CREATES, MAKES, BUILDS, INVENTS, DELIVERS in a VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE to help somebody who wants it. The only moral engine of economy and society is profit motive, not theft.
1
You can't substitute an argument with an ad-hominem and then argue it's an 'insult'. The ONLY insult here is the fact that I have to actually endure your writing.
1
The last refuge of the incompetent and the irrelevant is a ad hominem instead of an actual rational logical informative argument.
1
Again, 3000 dead. Oh, wow, that's terrible. That's 1 in a thousand of 1 percent. That's 99.999% SAFETY. That's without any FDA or anything, that's just with the technology and efficiencies that the market sets because of competition, nothing else, and it's all done in pursuit of profits. Pursuit of profits the MOST moral engine of progress.
1
Of-course the central planning (Marxism), which is Obama's religion, and the other forms of collectivism (socialism, fascism), they are dictatorial systems, that abuse those who produce and reward those who consume, while buying the votes of the consumers with the products created by the producers It is a system of theft, yes, and it's deeply immoral and unfair. That's why it's so ridiculous to listen to progressives and other socialists and Marxists who talk about 'fairness' and 'morality'
1
Regulations -> Steals individual freedoms -> corruption -> destroys economy -> causes deaths.
1
Governments specifically set up monopolies everywhere they turn. It could be monopolies, like in case of AT&T 100 years back, when gov't killed off 3000 competitors by making it ILLEGAL TO COMPETE with AT&T. It could be oligopolies, like banks, that are protected by enormous number of various very expensive regulations, complex taxes, everything that prevents a newcomer from entering the business.
1
Yeah, he has no argument but his ad-hominem. It's OK, I have the MATH on my side. 99.999% of food sold and consumed in USA is safe. That's what that 3000 number shows. It shows it's more dangerous to be in your bath, because 20,000 people a year die by slipping and hitting their heads, half a million get hurt, but 20,000 die. 3000 out of 300,000,000 is 1 of a 1000 of 1%. It's crazy safe, and it's made safe by companies, not by gov't.
1
Nope, there is a huge difference. Federal gov't is not allowed at all to do anything it's doing today, that's because it went above and beyond the Constitution. Constitution of any particular State is a separate matter. But AFAIC the criminal system itself shouldn't even be in the hands of gov't in the first place. Independent private courts, private prisons (and without various gov't regulations, the number of prisoners would be 1/100th or less of what it is today). Private cops obviously.
1
A natural monopoly doesn't hurt anybody either, for example da Vinci wrote his Mona Lisa painting in one copy, so if you own that, you have a 'natural monopoly' on that painting. Just like you have a 'natural monopoly' on your own body and mind. -- As to businesses that create products that people want, they are repeatable enterprises, otherwise they couldn't be done by people, and as such, without gov't they have to compete Gov't changes the rules and removes competition thus hurting people
1
So as per usual, TYT is absolutely useless on things that deal with economics, science, politics and obviously math. Yeah, simple math and statistics, this doesn't even enter the 'minds' of TYT crew. 3000 people. 1 out of 1000 of 1 percent. The industry is doing a WONDERFUL job providing ABSOLUTELY SAFE FOOD. More people die by slipping on their wet bathroom floor (20,000 per year) than die from food poisoning and apparently progressives can't count.
1
Economies of scale can exist in the markets. Monopolies are the domain of governments to set up and to foster and to bail out and to protect, that's because monopolies are the easiest way for governments to pump money out of economy into the politicians' hands. Monopolies have much more cash available than businesses that exist within competing markets, where the margins are slim and getting customers is difficult because of very wide variety of choices.
1
trust me, I shouldn't have to bother with your comment. I wasted an hour replying to about 15 ppl's comments, what makes you special? Monopolies cannot exist without gov't. Gov't is the only entity that can ENFORCE a monopoly, without gov't any so called 'monopoly' is just the company that is providing the best product at the best price at the moment and customers are served best by that company at the moment.
1
As a business you give with everything, you give your product, you give investment opportunities, you give jobs, you give the fucking taxes (and you shouldn't, but gov't is powerful) Everything you do is give. The gov't only takes, it can redistribute, but it only takes As a business owner your primary concern is profit, and in absence of gov't interference, you get profit by satisfying the market demand, which is done voluntarily and thus is the most moral thing as opposed to gov't force
1
Speed limits? Should be a completely private matter, because gov't shouldn't be in infrastructure, all roads should be private and thus private rules. Speed limits shouldn't exist. I like driving on Autobahn, maybe that's the only reason why I spend about 20% of my time in Germany.
1
3000 people out of 300,000,000 people died because of 'food poisoning' (which is very hard to prove) and this is a 'REAL PROBLEM'? ????? 30,000 died because of car accidents in the same year. 3000 dying is 5000 times smaller than margin of error. It's 1000th of 1%.
1
It's an ad hominem because there are no actual arguments, just feelings. If you have feelings and no arguments, you'll descend to ad-hominem, but that's OK, I don't have to participate in that.
1
The reason to have the gov't is protection of individual freedoms. Not welfare of individuals. Not free health care. Not bridges. Not banks. Not deciding what money is worth and NOT printing money, NOT setting interest rates. It was for protection of individual liberties and the powers of gov't are limited to what is LISTED in the Constitution. Constitution is the law, and the law explains what the gov't is allowed to do. Everything that is not explicitly allowed is not allowed at all.
1
You bought that nonsense hook line and sinker, why are you taking gov't word for what is EFFICIENT? GOVERNMENT TELLING YOU WHAT EFFICIENT!???!!!!??? Are you drunk? Are you high? Are you crazy? Or are you gullible? Or are you just a product of the gov't propaganda machine, that drilled into your head that nonsense and you can't get away from it? - Take a step back and think about it for a microsecond. What is better: gov't setting up monopolies or Free Market ATTEMPTING to find the solution?
1
and there is absolutely no difference between a private person (as a company) providing market with an electronic device or providing market with food or medicine, absolutely none. He has to do the same thing: account for all costs, make a product that sells, cover costs and generate profits on top, so that the company can be grown further. Since you can't have a successful company without profits, the profits are your motivator and you are doing everything that market desires for profit.
1
You don't understand money. Money is not pieces of paper, it's the wealth that is created by the businessmen, who save some money and start their own business, and if they succeed, what they are producing is money. If you remove the concept of fiat and take a step back and look at money for what it is, things that we produce, then you'll realise that it's not about 'the system that we have created' We haven't created 'the system', we are born into a system where we MUST PRODUCE or we die, yes
1
FDA absolutely CANNOT inspect all food, it's absolutely impossible. To inspect ALL food that 300,000,000 (or is it 330,000,000 already?) eat, it would take at least 10,000,000 people just to do that. That's is absolutely insane! In fact with ONLY 3000 dead a year, it means that the industry itself is producing 99.999% SAFE FOOD. You can't get safer that that, that is 5000 times better than even margin of error, it's INSANE HOW SAFE THE FOOD IS!
1
Fucking piece of shit, Romney, said in his 'debate' (which was not a debate, it was a joke), he said: "I am pro-regulations, for example we must regulate so that banks are not ran from people's garages" (I am paraphrasing) Why the fuck not? Why can't banks be ran from garages? What? A bank in a garage would do something as stupid as give out mortgages to people who couldn't repay the debt??? Best companies start in garages. If more banks were in garages, they wouldn't be 'too big to fail'
1
You have it BACKWARDS. Completely backwards. The utilities and trucking companies, those were set up to be monopolies by gov't. The utilities have nothing about them that would make them 'natural monopolies'. It's pure gov't political nonsense. This is true about power lines, phone lines, even water, gas and sewer. However it's done, there is absolutely no reason for any of it to be a monopoly but gov't. As to trucking, the gov't statistics lie, they don't account for independent truckers!
1
If 3000 people died, then food is not 99% safe. USA is 300 Million people. It means that food is 99.999% safe.
1
NO WAY IN HELL. Desire to help others is fine, as long as you are doing it by running a BUSINESS that helps others, by GIVING THEM WHAT YOU PRODUCE at a fair price and good quality. "desire to help others" by STEALING from some to give to others is completely IMMORAL and should be eradicated from this planet.
1
Absolutely! There should be no gov't involvement in roads in the first place, the highway act was a case of usurpation of power, it was completely unconstitutional. All roads should be private and it's up to the private owners of the roads to set whatever rules (maybe no speed limits) in pursuit of profits and to maintain service that is promised for the money that is paid.
1
Profit motive is the MOST MORAL ENGINE of economy ever known to men kind. It becomes extremely 'immoral' once it is coupled with government, which meddles with the free market and creates imbalances, creates moral hazards, raises prices, destroys quality and economy in general by promising people SOMETHING FOR NOTHING. Something for nothing - that's absolutely immoral, because there is no such thing, it means STEALING from some people to buy votes of others, absolutely immoral.
1
Completely disagree. Even in cases of murder. IN FACT that's not the domain of the Federal gov't in USA right NOW. It's a State by State basis actually. That's right. Criminal code, handling of various offenders, it's NOT part of federal gov't purpose at all and even today it's not done by the federal gov't. So you are clearly uninformed, talk about a child.
1
Free Market regulates by denying you customers if you do not care about their wellness. You'll lose credibility and your good name if you sell tainted food on constant basis. If you KILL people by negligence, even then there are actual laws against it already - manslaughter. -- There is absolutely no need for FDA and this story PROVES THAT POINT This very story proves that the companies are very good at managing safety FDA doesn't inspect anything yet food is 99.999% safe. Excellent record
1
You are completely and utterly wrong on what the purpose of gov't is in USA (at least the reason why the Federal gov't was actually established, and the fact that it was established as a REPUBLICAN gov't, a REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC) It had NOTHING to do with infrastructure and individual welare, it had nothing to do with bridges and ferries. It had everything to do with creating more equitable RULES of behaviour BETWEEN STATES. That's the reason - to ensure competition between states.
1
The reason to have a gov't is NOT to have a CENTRAL PLANING authority, that's exactly what the USA was founded AGAINST. Central planning is the exact opposite of freedom, because central planning requires authoritative, dictatorial powers and it diminishes the individual freedoms. No, USA was set up as a representative republic, so that REPRESENTATIVES would be voting in elections and it was not a direct democracy, because the Founders knew that democracy leads to tyranny - mobocracy.
1
Oh, and by the way, I often drive on Autobahn, I consider myself to be pretty SLOW at 220KM PER HOUR.
1
If you do not see the difference, may I suggest getting a perspective. It's called FREEDOM. You are not forced by any particular farmer to buy his produce. You are not forced by any particular toll operator to drive on his road. You are not even forced by the free market to use any particular money. By the way, the 'colony', the 'some place', it was started by what you'd consider libertarians and anarchists (and some would call terrorists even), it was USA. Secession may be the key.
1
That's ridiculous nonsense. FDA doesn't do anything to check the food that is produced daily for 300,000,000 people. It's the COMPANIES who want RETURN CUSTOMERS and who do not want LAWSUITS because of wrongful deaths, that the food is safe. -- None of it changes the issue that TYT doesn't understand math and statistics.
1