General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

whyamimrpink78
Secular Talk
comments

Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Private Health Insurers Accidentally Make The Case For Single-Payer" video.

The Seahawks should have ran the ball
2
Biggie should not have went back to Cali Cali.
2
Lincoln should have read the reviews on how bad the play was.
2
Uh, I can do that. The reason why is because the issue is very complicate. It isn't as easy as "other countries do this and it works". Well, what the US has works as well . It also is not as easy as "we can just use single payer and solve all our problems". It isn't that easy. To do that you will be 1. Replace our system with problems with another system with just as many problems 2. Creating a recession and job loss 3. Forcing the vast majority of citizens to change their habits due to higher taxes This is why single payer failed to pass in Vermont and Colorado. The issue is complex. And this is why I despise liberals even though I am a moderate as they have a very simplistic view on the issues.
2
If the states want to set up their own healthcare systems then fine. That is constitutional and I see the reasoning behind it.
2
Urban, to fix healthcare we need to get the federal government out of it. We need to remove the payroll tax so that people can buy their own insurance and allow companies to compete which will lower prices and increase competition. I agree, prices are high and are a problem, but everything else is great. Prices are high because of the federal government getting involved in the first place.
2
Gary Anderson should have made the field goal.
1
Actually compared to what we have single payer is neither better nor worse.
1
Because the system the US has is just as good as the UK has, and in some ways better.
1
tony bennet, read this book http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf Just because you can read a few UN numbers does not mean you are an expert on healthcare.
1
Sonik, do I need to come over to your place and read the book to you? Is reading that difficult for you?
1
tony bennett, that book is written by two professors, one who is the chair of their department. They cite peer review journals and give their methods. Just because it is from AEI does not mean it is unreliable. Also, they criticize the US system, you will see that if you read the book. "What is this "diverse" that blocks universal healthcare? " Different society. The US is essentially 50 countries in one. People who point towards Denmark, Norway, Sweden, etc. don't realize they have different systems as well and are the size of states.
1
William Harvey, what this video does not bring up is that a lot of overhead cost goes into actually saving money overall. Spending on anti-fraud programs or disease awareness programs saves money. So saying that 20% goes to something not related to healthcare is not true. 1. Read this book https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf 2. 1/6 of our GDP is in healthcare. Going to single payer will mean jobs will be lost, for example in the insurance company, and our tax code will be change. There will also be a change in how money flows because that 20% you complain about will go away. You will perturb the economy creating a recession. Now how long it will be is not known, but any recession will hurt millions of people which is not necessary considering we will not be gaining anything in the end. But there is no way you can change the economy that much without creating a recession 3. How will they save money? They will be paying higher taxes. Most people get their insurance through their employer and pay very little. I pay nothing for mine as my employer pays it all. Also, the plan to offer healthcare involves raising the payroll tax which will also lead to lower wages.
1
" Why are we 43rd on life expectancy" There are several variables that play a role in life expectancy. If you remove car accidents and murders, things not strongly connected to healthcare, the US is number one in life expectancy.
1
DootDoot, citing overhead cost is deceptive. A lot of overhead cost goes towards saving money such as anti-fraud cases and disease awareness. With government healthcare it would behoove them to pay for anti-fraud programs. Government also has other programs to do things like promote disease awareness that does not come out of Medicare or Medicaid. That is why those programs have less overhead. The government has the CDC for example to promote disease awareness where insurance companies have to pay for themselves. They don't have a separate department like the government does.
1
The founding fathers would have been against socialized healthcare. If they were for it they would have put it in the constitution.
1
Right to life does not mean you can take from others. Healthcare is a service industry for the most part. Someone has to provide it to you. So unless you enslave doctors you won't be guarantee it.
1
AlphaMikeOmega, read this book http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf There is much more to life expectancy than just healthcare.
1
lithium25693, two reasons. One, most are forced to use it. Next, they paid into it so might as well get their money back.
1
Willie Gandy, that book is full of facts and statistics. They cite their sources and give their methods.
1
Lithium, people are forced to use medicare. You can still use private insurance but people are forced to use medicare. The poverty line is not 29K a year. Also, how many of the elderly have a retirement savings and have major expenses, such as a house, paid off? " It amazes me that after every other modern nation in the world has adopted a single payer system" Good for them, now how many of them have landed on the moon? "some Americans still believe private insurance is the best option." Because comparably it is. I gave you a book to read on it, you should read it.
1
I am just saying those countries are not exactly better. Again, on poverty, how many of them have a home to pay off? How many of them have kids? I earn $23,000 last year. I have my insurance paid for and I am not poor at all. When you change the standards to fit your propaganda you can make anything work in your favor.
1
My employer pays for my healthcare. Who is paying half of their income in healthcare? Also, under single payer our taxes will triple. Cruz said it in the debate and Bernie did not deny it. Do I want to be poor the rest of my life? One, I am not poor. Two, no as I am a doctorate candidate.
1
Most likely the payroll tax. The big downsize of the payroll tax is that employers pay for it as well meaning lower wages on top of higher taxes.
1
FICA taxes
1
Urban, I can give a better argument, but fact is that Cruz brought out numbers showing 1. how much universal healthcare will cost 2. how we can't afford it And Bernie did not give a rebuttal. The biggest supporter of it can not even defend it. That right there shows how bad of an idea it is.
1
Emeril, than why didn't Bernie say that? And how will single payer save money without reducing the quality? Think about it, you are increasing demand for healthcare without increasing the supply of it. The college loan program did that as well and look at what happened to tuition.
1
Urban, the Commonwealth Fund used a phone survey which is typically not reliable. Also, they did not give the data in detail which prevents others from doing statistical regression models. Bottom line: There isn't enough being presented to support their case. I suggest you look for more sources.
1
"Then How do i measure healthcare ? i would rather use methods used by WHO " Which was criticized so much that they refuse to publish another ranking. They compared the US to countries like Malta and Andorra. Andorra has a population that is so small that we can fit all of their citizens in many of our football stadiums with room to spare. Around 80% of their GDP is in tourism and they are a tax haven. So a small country that attracts money will be successful all around. You can't compare Andorra to the US or Norway or France or Germany or any country. Anyone who takes the WHO ranking seriously is, to me, foolish. "like life expectancy child mortality , women death at child birth , which indicate that USA healthcare is shit compared to others " Depending on what statistical regression model you use the US is better than all of those countries. But the reality is that the differences are minute that changing one minor variables in the statistical model makes the numbers completely different. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf Read that for more info. In short, nothing indicates that "USA healthcare is shit compared to others". "In fact it's certain you would be better off if we reduce complexity" Healthcare is a complex issue to begin with, what you are describing does not exist. " by giving you a simple sign here get health if needed especially when it's factually better , you will have more time doing other things" One, it is not factually better. Two, you will be waiting for your healthcare longer. Hard to read when you are in pain. " You can be a democratic nation and poor , or a dictatorship with a working economy i can walk you through the examples if you need . " Give some, and also show how it lasted in the long term. "some of us believe the issue is with big industry mostly and solution by shrinking their power , break up monopolies ect ," Businesses have zero power, government has all the power. All a business can do is offer you a job and/or a product. Government forces thing. Increasing the powers of the federal government will increase corruption. " 5 min google cost per capita cost , any other system is better than the one in USA , and they have far stronger government presence , or straight public system all together " And they have much smaller populations. On top of that their systems are not any better than what we have. "Factually in case government bureaucracy is more efficient than corporate bureaucracy " That is not true as a business has to actually earn a profit and can't just keep raising their debt ceiling. They have to serve the people or go out of business. Government will always exist. Look at the retention rate of congress and compare it to their approval rating. "let me remind there are other countries in the world than the USA ." Other countries keep cost down by rationing care. Also, we have to stick to the US on this issue. Name one liberal policy established at the federal level that cost less than projected. "and btw one of the ways public healthcare tries to reduce his costs is preventive medicine , they would encourage you to quit smoking for instance" Insurance companies do that by giving you lower premiums. For example, in my job if you give them records showing you are at a certain level health wise you get a lower premium.
1
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf It is a debate
1
Did you even read the book? It is debatable as nothing says what other countries have is better than the US.
1
Again read the book. The US gets better results in many ways. Cost is a problem that is created by the federal government becoming involved. Also, Kyle is a hack that has no knowledge on healthcare.
1
"shows that without having to advertise for insurance will reduce the cost" So you support an uninformed society that can't make decisions on their own?
1
There is a debate. Again, read the book I linked you. Also, based on your comment you know little about science. The evidence for flat earth is incredibly weak which is why there is no debate there Creationism is not science which is why there is no debate there When you say climate deniers I bet you include skeptics there as well. Skeptic does not mean denier. But I also assume you don't have a strong grasp of the english language. As a whole, with healthcare, there is a debate. Nothing says that single payer is superior, period.
1
I did not misrepresent your argument. You want to eliminate advertising and have the government decide everything for you. But you are saying creationism is science, so it is safe to say you are not very intelligent to begin with.
1
"no need to read that book, I have looked up this before." Ok, where? I provided my source. " I know enough about science." Not really. I study science for a living. " You don't if you think creationism is valid counter agrument to evolution" Never said it was. One of science, one isn't. They are not comparable. In the healthcare debate it is about markets, so they are the same subject in respect with that. "Private health care agrument is just as weak as flat earth or creationism" How so? You have yet to give a reasoning. I can say the argument is as strong as the nature vs nurture debate. "All climate deniers are skeptics of climate change" Skeptic does not equal denier. Skepticism is the driving force of science. "even though vast majority of scientists back climate change being valid theory" Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. Hardly anyone denies that. " If you question validity of scientific consensus, you are denier." No one is questioning scientists. They are questioning liberal politicians and the liberal media who misrepresent science. People are on the scientists side. "Funny how there are sources saying that single payer is superior in cost, cover, and health care provided. " But yet you give me none, and I gave you a book on the topic. "You jusf deny that information to say that there is no evidence to show one superior to another" Because there isn't. "Isn't everyone covered by single payer superior to not everyone covered, " Covering everyone is impossible unless you lower the quality. No country covers everyone unless they are very small in size. " what Kyle showed that medicare cost more goes to care vs overhead, doesn't have to spend money on advertising which reduces the cost of health care overall" People are forced to us medicare. They don't have a choice. They are forced to pay into it as well. Your argument is not valid at that point. "doesn't that make single payer superior to privatize health care in cost." No, because with private I have a choice. With medicare I don't.
1
" you don't get how freedom of religion laws past by right wingers that allow people to discriminate against lgbts isn't an anti gay laws." It isn't anti-gay laws. You don't have a right to someone's services. Jim Crow laws was the government forcing discrimination. The religious freedom laws gives businesses a choice. A business should have the right to deny someone if they want to as long as that business is private.
1
" advertising doesn't make one informed on if private vs public health care debate, or which one is better." It makes you informed on which private option is better. "Also me saying that with public heathcare there is no need to advertise healthcare because everyone has the same healthcare." Yep, no choice. Everyone gets the same crappy care. Just like Jim Crow laws forced businesses to discriminate, they had no choice.
1
"but somehow you think that I said creationism is valid." You just did when you showed how you are not informed on climate change.
1
" the debate is between insurance company supporters, and people who want a healthcare system that actually works" No it's not. One, they system we have now works as well. Next, I want insurance companies to compete. "private healthcare doesn't work. " You saying it does not make it so. "if it worked so great, why don't more countries use it? " The vast majority of countries in the world used slavery and it "worked" as well. "because single payer is vastly superior." Nothing says that is so though. That is why the argument exists. If you look at my arguments I will never say what the US has is superior, I just say it is on par with what other countries have.
1
Yes, posting a link is an argument. I guess I can be like you. Here, I will act like you The debate is over. Private healthcare is far superior. The debate is as asinine as the flat earth vs round earth debate. It is over. Single payer sucks and everyone knows it. All studies show it. A video by Rush Limbaugh, Stefan Molyneux, Steven Crowder all show that. See, that is how you sound.
1
" because 97% of scientists agree that is happening, " The 97% numbers has been debunked many times. For example, one source was from a PNAS paper that polled many scientists but only 21% respond. That is only 19% of scientists. I feel you are a denier of basic literacy skills.
1
Sean, I never said the US system is superior in any serious tone. It is on par with other countries as zero evidence exists that shows that single payer is superior.
1
"Funny how insurance companies have monopolies in some areas of the country and there is no competition." I know, you can thank the government for that. "Actually it doesn't work because vast numbers that are uninsured, " Why does insurance equal healthcare? And why is there no competition between companies? Why do so many people get their insurance through their employer? "People use things that works... yes slavery worked at one point in time. But funny how it doesn't. "' Slavery has always worked, it was not moral. " much like single payer health insurance is, lower cost, more people are covered." With lower quality. So what do you achieve? "The amount of people that single payer covers vs private health care shows that it is better" Again, with lower quality. Covering everyone is not a success if the quality sucks. " US private health care system isn't on par with UK, Japan, S Korea, or Canada" As a whole it is. You want to cover everyone but never mention quality. I want high quality and cover as many people as possible. To you a successful system is 100% covered but with poor quality. To me I will take 80% covered with high quality where you won't. That is the difference. You want to bring everyone down to the norm, I want to bring people up and give people a chance to get high quality care.
1
I was being sarcastic with that one comment to show how asinine you look with your comment. I guess you can't sense sarcasm. I will never say, in a serious tone, that the US system is superior. But you are the one who does not understand science or climate change. You feel that man is causing all of it. So now you not only do not support the theory of evolution, you are also a young earth theorist.
1
Dubhglas MacDubhghlas, you are a young earth theorist and don't support evolution. Anything you say means nothing. Also, not everyone is covered in the UK. They ration their care.
1
Sean Ryan, read this book https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf The quality is lower in many ways.
1
"I never said a good system is everyone covered but has poor quality" But you never mentioned quality. You just want to cover everyone. You don't care about quality which is why you never bring it up. Your goal is not quality, you goal is to get everyone covered. Just like Obamacare's goal was to get more people on insurance. They did not care about the quality of insurance or the premiums. This is where you are losing the argument and you are defeating yourself. But again, you are a young earth theorist.
1
"Funny how you said UK healthcare is on par with the US.... yet they have public healthcare. " I said in terms of overall results. Both have problems. The problems are different, but both have problems. With that in mind there is no need to scrap the system the US has but instead improve on it. "Just because I never mentioned quality doesn't mean that I am for poor quality." Yes it does as you refuse to care about the details of the complex issue of healthcare. My goal is high quality care to as many people as possible. Your goal is to just cover everyone. You don't care about quality. "UK doesn't have poor quality, nor does Canada 0, Japan, South Korea. " In many ways they do. Wait times are longer for example. There have been people who died because of low quality of care. "In fact the article the OP posted showed that they have better quality and pay less more patient beds so more treatment for people...." They did not post an article. "You don't have an agrument." Yes I do because you are taking a complex issues and ignoring the details and complexity of the situation. You simply feel that all we have to do is develop single payer and everything will be all better. The quality won't change at all. That is not so. For example, the college student loan program made college more accessible to students. What happened was tuition sky rocketed.
1
"improve on the US health care is to go to public option." There is an argument there as long as it is at the state and local level. But what is wrong with also expanding the free market as well to expand competition? Why are you so opposed to that? I see the benefits of a public option at the state and local level. "No, it doesn't. Just because someone doesn't mention something doesn't mean that they are for poor quality. " You are being vague on a complex issue. "Yet many people die in the US for lack of care," Eh, not really. That is debatable. "No you don't have an agrument because you have strawman my agrument repeatedly." Never did. I am just pointing out how you are making vague claims on a complex issue. You want to cover everyone but never set a standard on quality. "Such as saying that I am young earth creationist when I am not. " You are the one who brought up the "flat earth vs spherical earth" and "climate change" debate as an comparison. I was pointing out how you are ignorant on climate change as well. But you were the one that started the asinine comparisons to avoid discussing a complex issue. ". Since you think UK is on par with the US and I want UK type of system I am not agruing for poor healthcare at all." The problem with that in order to implement it at the federal level you will end up creating the situation where 1. you are replacing one system with problems with another system with just as many problems 2. you will be creating an economic recession since healthcare is 1/6 of our economy. Also you will be killing jobs. Even if the recession is temporary, it is enough to hurt millions. 3. You will have to force millions of people to change their ways, such as pay higher taxes and thus have less income to invest. That is why Coloradocare and Vermontcare failed to pass. People, as a whole, like their healthcare and don't see a reason to make radical changes when they are not going to get a great return. This is why I support fixing the current system we have as opposed to completely replacing it.
1
"Single payer healthcare is not a loan," It will increase demand without increasing supply, same thing. " nor did skyrocketing tuition affect on the quality of education" It did in many ways such as larger classrooms and less time with professors. "Overall results are better in those countries, again they have better outcomes and are overall happier with their healthcare at a far lower cost." You can't measure happiness as it is subjective and nothing indicates their results are better. " Shit like cancer gets treated instantly." US is number one in cancer survival rate if you want to use hard numbers. "Proof?" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/359265.stm There is one example. . You can find many more. "Yet you ignore how people die every year in this country and have been even before ACA due to lack of funding for their healthcare plan" That number is deceptive in some ways. Either way, in both systems people die. None of them are perfect. "ou ignore how we lead in bankruptcies for healthcare by far." Better than being dead.
1
" funny how when uk went to public heathcare price went down. " And so did the quality.
1
"Shit like cancer gets treated instantly. " http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in-Europe.html
1
"Healthcare is service not product, so supply and demand isn't fitting to a service industry" 100% wrong. People provide the service. If we lack doctors than that means less services. "Lol classroom size hasn't increased in colleges, also most students in college doesn't have time with professors in general." Yes it has. Also interaction with professors is important. When I was an undergrad I talked to my professors all the time. They all wrote me letters of recommendation to get me in grad school. I push students to talk to professors. "Yes, you can measure happiness." No you can't, it is subjective. "One example is anecdotal evidence. How about a study." More than you ever provided. "Yet, more uninsured equal more people dying from without treatment." Not necessarily true. "When they can't pay they lose their homes, and because homeless. Which means that they will die." So are they bankrupt or homeless? Which is it. You are making things up here. "no uk healthcare didn't go down in quality. Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" I gave evidence of people dying on waiting lists. "States don't have funding for while the federal does. " 100% false. The federal government is in massive debt. Also if you lower federal taxes than that means more revenue for the people to have to spend at states which typically have consumption taxes. " The free market system leaves people uninsured." Single payer system leaves people on waiting lists. So what do you gain? "I'm not being vague at all, I have been quiet direct with you." No, you are being vague. What quality do you want? "44,789 people die a year without healthcare in the US, according to politifact." Which is deceptive. One, that is only around 0.01% of the population. Next, those individuals are poor and typically the poor are unhealthy and irresponsible to begin with. That plays a role. Thus that 0.01% is noise. Put it this way, K-12 education is free in all 50 states. As is 12% of the native population does not hold a high school diploma despite it being offered to them. That is because they are irresponsible. ". You claiming that I am young earth creationist is strawman. " Playing you at your own game. You make asinine comments than so will I. " You also saying that I support low quality healthcare is strawman." You never mention quality, you mention access. You bring up the UK and how everyone has access when they have low cancer survival rate. " The issue isn't complex as you make it out to be." It is complex. You are dealing with something that it 1/6 of our economy. You are dealing with a market that has the majority of the workforce holding doctorate degrees or advanced, specialized degrees. The issue is complex. You have clearly never done any type of work in healthcare at all. I work in research that is used by the healthcare industry. I teach nursing students and the work is stressful and complex. You feel that all we have to do is create single payer and it will be all better. If it were that simple I will be the first to push for it. The fact is that it isn't. That is why there is a debate. "Actually uk system has less problems than the US." Not true. They have just as many, they are just different. "Insurance companies are not apart of the health care system. They are separated thing. Auto insurance doesn't get added into the automotive stats. So you don't know what you are talking." Now you just contradicted yourself. You earlier said this " 44,789 people die a year without healthcare in the US, according to politifact." Which they mean insurance. "So what just because change happens doesn't mean that it's a bad thing." When you don't gain anything it is. " raise corporate taxes problem solved," And corporations leave. Now who do you tax? "and maybe the super rich." And that still won't cover the cost of healthcare. Cruz brought that up in the debate and Bernie did not give a rebuttal. "Yet UK system is actually better in coverage, and in healthcare, and cost." No they don't. But to quote you "Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
1
I will add some more. Healthcare is more than just a service industry. There is a lot of supply to it. We right now have a waiting list for organs for example. But, you really discredit yourself when you said this "Yet UK system is actually better in coverage, and in healthcare, and cost." But earlier said this "Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." So, to do what you do. The debate is over. The fact is that the US system is on par with other countries. Single payer is not any better than what the US has. The debate is as meaningless as the flat earth vs round earth debate. See how easy it was to act like you?
1
"he thinks climate change is a hoax perpetrated by scientists to get rich off of those "lucrative" grants" Never said that, but whatever.
1
"other countries using socialized healthcare with comparable incomes have longer life expectancies and lower infant mortality" There are other factors that play a role in those numbers besides healthcare. For example, with life expectancy, if you remove car accidents and murders, things not strongly connected with healthcare, the US is number one in life expectancy. That is why I say in my previous comments I said that depending on what statistical regression model you use the US is number 1 in at times. The numbers are so minute that you can't say which country is better which is why I say single payer is not superior at all since no data supports that it is.
1
" first you assert that poor people are irresponsible and deserve to die, " Never said they deserve to die. I said they are typically irresponsible which is true for poor people. They are poor for a reason. "Then you assert that being uninsured is somehow better than being insured and having to wait" Never said that either. "Meanwhile, you've lied about differences in healthcare quality," Nope. "Man, I thought conservatives were stupid and immoral. Then I met libertarians." I think you are angered about how I called you out on your lack of evidence. I think you are mad that I used your own words against you.
1
"supply in supply and demand is a product, not service. Yet, heathcare for all doesn't mean less doctors...." No, you have limited services as well. For example, say a school does not have someone that can teach spanish. That school can't offer any spanish courses. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/supply.asp Notice it says services. Also yes, we will be short doctors. "Lol most people don't get the chance to talk to professors in college." 100% not true. Most do. Apparently you never been to college. "Yes, you can servy people opinions can measure happiness." Which is, again, subjective. "Yet, anecdotal evidence isn't good evidence, for some who works studying science should know that." But apparently a survey to gather opinions on someone's lifestyle is good evidence? "Actually it does. If you are not insured you don't get regular check ups, which means that cholesterol, blood pressure, etc levels can become uncheck, and you can die from heart attack out of no where, or stroke." And you can drive from a car accident tomorrow, so what's your point? Routine check ups are cheap and in my opinion should not be covered by insurance. "When you go bankrupt you can still lose your home." If you are that financially unstable chances are you don't own a home. "Funny how UK has more patient beds per capita than the US, " So now the number of beds means higher quality? There is more to it than that. I guess you should lay down while you wait for your doctor if they ever come before you die. "you even said it was on par to the US healthcare system." All things consider it is. That means we get similar results when you consider the cost. "Kansas doesn't nor does Kentucky they are deeply in debt." Not as much as the US is. "For minor things, yet uk doesn't have waiting list, nor does Canada. " 100% false. Even strong supporters of single payer admit there will be waiting lists. "I already said the quality I want, good health care, fucking dumbass." Oh, now you say it. How good? The US is number one in cancer survival rate for example. The UK is last. Do you want the UK quality or the US quality? "Just because someone is poor doesn't mean that they are irresponsible" For the most part it does. "yet they have no heathcare that's why they are unhealthy, " You can eat healthy and exercise without insurance. "but you don't care about them because they are poor" I do care about them. I want them to have high quality healthcare if they work for it. You want to give them the illusion they have healthcare. "45k people is still alot of people dying unnecessary due to having no health insurance. " That is only 0.01% of the US population. That is noise at that point. You can't say the sole reason why they die is because of lack of healthcare. "Yet, that's false comparison... since if healthcare was public they would have healthcare, so that number would go down." Unless they get put on a waiting list, or don't seek healthcare at all. "I haven't made asinine comments, " I don't think you know what the word "asinine" means. "No I have not contradicted myself. Health insurance numbers are not part of health care industry... just like automotive insurance isnt apart of automotive industry. Nothing there is contradictory." And then " Yes, they mean insurance because insurance means access to heathcare in the US." "They don't leave. You can heavly penalize them if they leave. You can force them to stay." So they jack up prices. Congrats, now everything is more expensive. " Cruz and Bernie Sanders didn't debate" Really? "It's fact UK has better coverage since all are covered" With lower cancer survival rate. So you again support everyone being covered regardless of quality. "But you deny climate change is man made" Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. This is why I am calling you a young earth theorist. You feel climate change is caused by man, thus you feel that the earth is young. I feel that climate change has been happening since earth as been in existence. While man plays a role, how much is in question.
1
" I've honestly never seen a libertarian that supported LGBT rights." Name me one right that LGBT people lack. ""I feel" it doesn't matter how you feel. Anthropogenic climate change is real and it's happening. Private insurance doesn't work. Taxation isn't theft. Poor people aren't lazy or stupid." I never said taxation was theft. Man is playing a role in climate, but to what degree is in question, unless you are a young earth theorist as well. Private insurance works fine. I want competition which is what insurance companies don't want (so no, I am not a shill for insurance companies). Poor people are typically poor for a reason, and it is laziness and irresponsibility.
1
" irrelevant to health care..." Not it's not. You just showed you don't know the definition of supply. "Actually we won't be short doctors. " We already are, unless some are just hiding out and waiting for single payer to become a thing. "I have been to college. Most professors who teach lectures have over hundred of students in a classroom. Thus it's not possible for the students have face time with the students." I doubt you have. But students have plenty of opportunity to see professors. They choose not to which is another issue in itself. As a TA right now my students hardly come to office hours. . Those that do, though, get free help and they excel in the course. One went from getting a 30 on her physics test to getting a B in the end of the course after she started seeing me for help. "Just because it's subjective doesn't mean that it cannot be measured" Yes it does because it does not measure quality. All it measures is people being satisfied with what they have. "Yes, because surveys with good sample size done right can give good idea on people opinions on the quality of health care. " Yeah, but they are just one of many variables. " My point is that not having health insurance leads to people dying. Which that point illustrates. Actually they are not that cheap, they are over hundred bucks more when testing is done. If you think they are cheap then you really don't know much about healthcare." My checkups cost around $30. And people die for several reasons. There are people who die in Las Vegas due to no AC. So should we give out free AC to people? "People who go bankrupt often have home." And thus poor money management skills. If you can't afford a home don't get one. "Actually it's part of the quality, because what good is healthcare if hospitals don't have enough beds for people." But again, just one part. Many variables here, this is a complex issue. "No you was talking about quality... cost is irrelevant to quality... " You get what you pay for. "Yet, you still have waiting list in the US to see a doctor..." Much shorter lists though "Shows that people have taken the cancer survival rate out of context... because there is an over diagnosis of prostate cancer... so your cancer survival rate is bs right wing propaganda." It is not a right wing propaganda. Now you did something intelligent for once. You showed that using a statistical regression model the numbers can change which is what the book did that I linked a while ago. That shows who minute the overall results are here. Thus you can't say what system is better. All systems have pros and cons and all systems have problems. To say single payer does not have problems is simply lying. People have died due to waiting lists. But according to you they are covered. Waiting is not getting covered. But this is the one intelligent thing you did. Now why don't you support any of the statistical regression models I gave you? I feel it is because you are myopic and bias and thus, as a whole, not very intelligent. "No it doesn't mean that they are irresponsible. Many people who are not smart enough to get into college are poor, the whole myth poor is irresponsible is more right wing propaganda." For the most part they are irresponsible. And going to college does not mean anything if you get a women's study degree. "No, you don't care for them. They do work, but they don't have enough money to buy health insurance." Work is subjective. They refuse to develop skills to earn more. "Actually the sole reason is that they don't have healthcare. " No it's not. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/sep/06/alan-grayson-claims-45000-people-die-year-because-/ "Katherine Baicker, a Harvard University health economics professor, echoed that it’s hard to get good evidence for a connection between lacking insurance and dying. The uninsured often earn less money than those who have insurance, she said, and poverty is associated with worse health." There are other links there as well to show that it is not solely because of healthcare. But, of course, you will deny them. "Increase taxes doesn't mean that the price will go up. Because the government can regulate the price of things. " Ok, so they fire workers and produce less meaning less wealth. I feel you don't understand economics too well. Price control has never worked. "Yup Cruz and Sanders didn't debate." They did on CNN recently. "Lol me thinking man has effected climate change through increasing the amount of green house gases in ozone... Which is backed up by scientific community." But to what degree. You will never find that in any scientific literature. "There is no question that man played large role," Yes there is because nothing has been published showing to what degree. "Thus you are the one who is denying science" I am a doctorate candidate in physical chemistry. I study science for a living. "by your own logic you would be a young earth creationist since they are skeptical of theory of evolution" There are many questions involving evolution. There is a reason why it is a graduate level course. Also, being skeptical is a part of science. If we weren't skeptical quantum mechanics would have never came about. If you studied science for a living like I do you will understand this. You saying what you do makes you anti-science. "even though there is overwhelming evidence for evolution" Which is why it is a theory I support. "and also that public health care is better than private." No evidence for that what so ever. You have yet to show me evidence for that. I have you a book to read on it and all you did was ignore it. But hey, easier to be ignorant than actually work. I feel you are one of those poor who went to college. Tell me, what is your degree in? And what do you do for a living?
1
" claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Zero evidence for your claims." I actually gave you plenty of evidence. From the very get go you said there is no argument. If that is the case than why did two professors, one who is the chair of their department, spend what little time they have writing a book on the issue? Maybe because there is, at the very least, a legit debate. This entire time I have shown I am a moderate where you have shown your bias. If there isn't a debate at all than professors and researchers will not be spending that much time on the issue. In science we do not talk about creationism as it is not science thus it is a non issue. But it is clear that the debate in healthcare is.
1
"it's not about lacking rights, but proecting rights, " What rights? The only right you have in terms of discrimination is that the government can't discriminate. When it comes to businesses you do not have a right to someone's services or goods. So what rights are being protected, and please cite the constitution. "doctoral canadite doesn't study science for a living, that's not a paid position. You are paying someone to learn.." 100% false. I sign a contract that pays for my tuition up to 9 credits. They pay for my healthcare insurance and give me a monthly stipend that is enough for me to live off of. The majority of universities offer that.
1
https://sciences.ucf.edu/physics/graduate/physics-program/financial-support/ That was one of the colleges that accepted me. Look at what they offer in terms of payment. "you’re paid to pursue your degree!" So yes, you are paid. It is a paid position. You clearly have no clue how universities work.
1
Based on this comment "doctoral canadite doesn't study science for a living, that's not a paid position" And the fact that the very beginning you said that there is no debate, but yet professors feel the need to keep doing research on the topic, it is clear I am debating a myopic fool. I am done as I have more important things to do.
1
Dubhglas MacDubhghlas, you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. The idea of getting a TA position is so you are paid to study and one part of studying is doing research. So yes, you are studying science for a living. "And if you are teaching you are not actually studying science for living." So all of those professors that teach don't study science for a living? Really? Are you that dumb? " btw you said you teach nurses" I teach students in the nursing program. But, in the end I do study science for a living. I have three peer reviewed publications. Many of my colleagues, who are also TAs, do as well. The point of being a TA is so that you do not have to find work off campus but instead you work on campus and earn enough money to live off of while you do research. I sign a 20 hour a week contract per semester but for the month of January and May, this spring semester, I do not teach a single class. I still get paid though. " i don't have to do more research on private vs public heathcare debate. " Professors feel the need to do more research, thus there still is a debate. But of course they teach thus they don't study anything. This entire time you have showed you have no clue what you are talking about.
1