Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Trumpcare Is A $600 Billion Tax Cut For The Rich" video.

  1. So someone that disagrees with you is a troll? Kyle is just an idiot. He presents this like it is a problem. How are tax cuts for the rich a problem? Saying Trumpcare will cut taxes does not immediately mean it is bad. Tomorrow is Friday.......is that bad?
    2
  2. Noel Grassy, do you even have a rebuttal? Kyle is presenting this issue as if tax cuts for the rich are automatically bad. I don't see the big deal with what Kyle is presenting here.
    2
  3. I get it, you hate rich people.
    1
  4. John Sayles, you point towards KS and others can point towards CA or Connecticut.
    1
  5. Kyle caters to the lower spectrum of liberals in terms of intelligence. Look at this video for example. He is screaming about a tax cut on the rich as if it is automatically bad. How is it bad? He never fully explains. To Kyle and his audience they want to tax the rich at an obscene amount, that is what they support for no other reason than their hatred for the rich. Ben Shapiro is way above Kyle and a debate between Kyle and Ben would be similar to the Dallas Cowboys playing your local high school football team, it wouldn't be competitive at all. Also, Kyle is about of TYT an they never have open and fair discussions.
    1
  6. Peter H, Shapiro beat Davide Pakman in a debate. Shapiro is willing to debate several college students and professors. He debated Piers Morgan. You can find numerous videos of him debating people and winning. The main factor, though, is that he is willing to do it. He is willing to go out there and debate people in the open on the spot on any topic. Kyle doesn't. Kyle literally works in an echo chamber. "Shapiro lies a lot to prove his points" Now the burden of proof is on you. Where did Shapiro lie?
    1
  7. Berny Marcus, the debate begins with Obamacare did not work, which is hasn't been working at all.
    1
  8. The tax burden does not necessarily get shifted though. Yes, Kyle works in an echo chamber. He never debates anyone.
    1
  9. Peter H., in reality there is no one on the left right now I will consider to be an intellectual. Many on the right aren't either (in terms of talking heads). Ben Shapiro is intelligent though and I have yet to see anyone match wits to him or would come close. Also, Kyle and David P. are not that intelligent. Shapiro debated David P. before and had no problem. Kyle is not even on the same level as David P as Kyle is a complete idiot. A Shapiro vs. Kyle debate will be ugly for Kyle.
    1
  10. Sam Harris will do well against Shapiro, but I don't consider Harris to be left wing as he is more moderate. Richard Dawkins is nothing more than a troll that has not contributed anything intellectually in over 30 years.
    1
  11. Peter H., again, the burden of proof is on you. When did Shapiro lie? When did he use misleading data? I can give examples of when Kyle does if you want me to. But I want you to do the same for Shapiro. "Show me a single debate against a liberal where shapiro "won" without using fallacious argument, " I asked you to show me proof first but yet you haven't. I gave you examples of how Shapiro won. Unless you can point how how he lied or used misleading data than you have nothing. I can give examples of Kyle doing that though.
    1
  12. Peter H., Richard Dawkins is a troll that has not produced anything intellectual in over 30 years. He took the atheist thing and ran with it. As a scientist myself I find him to be an embarrassment to the scientific community and so do other scientists. PS: You never asked me for proof, you asked the original poster. I asked you for proof to where he lied. If you can't give me proof on where he lied than that means in ever debate he has been in he won.
    1
  13. Harry, healthcare is way more complicated that that. We don't need universal healthcare, we need to improve the system we have. To me that is reduce federal government's influence on it (like Obamacare). Replacing it with universal healthcare means 1. Replacing our system with another system with just as many problems 2. Perturbing the economy to the point there will be an economic downfall and job loss 3. Forcing the vast majority of the country to pay much more in taxes which they won't like when they don't have a problem with the current system as is (which is why Coloradocare and Vermontcare did not pass)
    1
  14. If you are talking about the debate with David than yes. But what about other debates as well?
    1
  15. fallenz1z, the fact that Kyle refuses to debate anyone in a fair manner means he already lost.
    1
  16. 1. Yes I was talking about that unless you know of another debate 2. I am a scientist. What makes you think I am not? 3. I know the definition of the word "intellectual" 4. What has he done for the scientific community in the past 30 years? Your character attacks shows you are losing this discussion now.
    1
  17. Peter H, I seem to have silenced you.
    1
  18. 1. Ok 2. What change? You say he produced a lot. Well, tell me? As a whole he hasn't because for the past 30 years he have been running around being the face of atheism. He has abandoned his scientific roots and have created a religion. 3. There is a connection with single mothers and crime though. How is it misleading? You just saying it is does not make it so. With single mothers you have a higher chance of poverty, kids will grow up to be less discipline, they will struggle in school more and will be more likely to cause crime. "So I ask you again, can you show me a debate with shapiro where he wins an argument without having to make shit up, " He doesn't make shit up though as you have not shown that he has. Here is what you said " this is misleading and incorrect data, this is a lie, or he's uneducated." How? How is it misleading? How is it incorrect? How is it a lie? How is he uneducated? You have to give your reasoning. I will give you an example on how to do that. Kyle talks about the min. wage a lot. He makes the claim that if kept up with inflation the min. wage will be some higher value. This is where he is misleading 1. He cherry picks the year that gives him the highest number. Other years give much lower numbers to where if you were to go back when the min. wage was created it is only around $4/hr. 2. Not everything inflates. If so than why aren't cell phones $4000? A brick cell phone in the 80s cost $4000 in today's money. But cell phones are not only cheaper today, but much better. You can say the same thing about other goods and also with services. How much is the Blockbuster employee worth today? $0. But according to Kyle they should both be employed still and paid over $10/hr. But the reality is not everything inflates You see what I did there? I am not trying to create a new argument. I am showing you how I can say that Kyle gave misleading data and I explained why. You have not done that with Shapiro. You just said he gave misleading data. Ok, how? Why is it misleading?
    1
  19. "all countries have their government involved in healthcare one way or another" Ok, which model do you follow? Also, I am not opposed to government not being involved, I am against the federal government being involved. Reform can be done at the state and local level. "because hands off Capitalism doesn't work " Depends on what you mean by that. What works to me is allowing the people to be in control of the economy as much as possible which means the people get the most our of our resources. I can't go on, there are these things called period. You should try them.
    1
  20. What studies? And what correlation? I don't see what you are arguing here now? 1. How did I lie? 2. What data? Please present it 3, What ideology so I have? 4. What words did I not use correctly? 5. Dawkins took the atheist idea and ran with it for fame. There have been atheists that said Richard Dawkins makes them embarrassed to be atheist. He has become a troll and has become the exact person he criticizes 6. I gave you evidence. All you have to do is show me where he lied. If he did not lie than he won every debate. " he was already lying within the first 2min" How? 7. Ok, what is your area of research? Mine is in study dynamics of biological materials such as peptides and RNA. For example I am currently look at how Amide I modes couple in a multi-residue peptide. From there was can use transition dipole coupling (TDC) to determine the structure of the peptides. 8. Physical chemistry with an emphasis on spectroscopy.
    1
  21. Harry, #periods
    1
  22. Peter H., I seem to have silenced you again.
    1
  23. No your point does not stand because you can't do something as simple as write periods look at how pathetic your comments look no periods does not make you look too bright i usually don't criticize poor grammar but something as simple as a period should be known how hard can it be you learn this in kindergarten #periods
    1
  24. Peter H, https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=167327 There is one source, there is a correlation if you look at other sources. ". you have made 0 effort to research and see why this is a claim that can't be made as it was shown that the correlation does not exist" But there is a correlation https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed375224 Oh look, another study. I can find more if you want. "but the data is now showing another trend" Which is what? Please explain and give citations. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0095798415619260 Oh my.....there are more. This one is from 2017. But please tell me how Shapiro is wrong.
    1