Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Left STANDS UP To Pelosi And WINS On Tax Rule" video.

  1.  @Sheepy-hp9je  , Kyle is losing viewers. I feel his audience is growing up and realizing how insane he is.
    3
  2. She is a moron. They don't hate her, they want to keep giving her the spotlight as she makes democrats look stupid.
    2
  3.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , you don't have to believe me. You have no control of my life. My adviser and committee does. So far, with 4 papers I would say I am on a nice track to get my PhD.
    2
  4.  @sterlings7098  , great, I was saying Joseph should donate to charity. If he wants to pay more he can give to charity. Or he can use some of that money to get a MD degree and help out with healthcare.
    2
  5. The far left will say that somehow this will save money. You know, a federal government that is around $20 trillion debt will somehow save us money because I guess the federal government can spend your money better than you can.
    1
  6.  @ded4lyfe1  , both parties have been in charge at one point or another and the debt has, for the most part, gone up.
    1
  7.  @ded4lyfe1  , it won't save money. It is an economic fallacy to say it will.
    1
  8.  @sprybug  , I have read the studies, I doubt you have. Those studies have way too many red flags. I actually have the most recent 'study" that Kyle cites open on my computer right now.
    1
  9.  @ded4lyfe1  , in the most recent study where it claims to save around $5 trillion they don't factor in obesity rates in healthcare outcomes along with many other factors. They point to the 45,000 who die a year due to lack of access to healthcare but did not cite Katherine Baicker's Oregon study out of the NEJM where one can argue that granting access to healthcare to those people will not save their life. It does not factor in the psychological aspect of people losing their jobs and having to find a new one and move. There is a lot of variables missing make the study unreliable.
    1
  10.  @ded4lyfe1  , they are not non factors. They are a crucial part of the argument. If you are going to argue that the US has bad outcomes you have to factor in everything. For example, our high obesity rates are due to our poor diet, not our healthcare system. The US has a high black population where blacks have a higher rate of heart disease. Establishing Medicare for all will lead to job loss. That study admits that they will have to account for that but they assume people will be willing to simply retrain and take on a new job even if it means they have to move. You have to consider everything. Healthcare is very complex. That study seems to ignore a lot of the human element of the issue.
    1
  11.  @sterlings7098  , the issue is that to pay for these programs that Kyle and the far left wants will require a tax increase on almost everyone. They refuse to admit that. Bernie refused to admit that until a guy from Denmark cornered him saying that Bernie wants to spend like a Scandinavian but not tax like one. Bernie at that point admitted that taxes will go up on everyone but then started to rant about how it will supposedly save money. This is a problem on the left. They are not being honest. How can we believe them that these programs they push will even work when they weren't honest about them to begin with?
    1
  12.  @franklance9167  , it isn't that easy. You are ignoring the increase in demand which will cause price increases. Also, you are ignoring the idea of what college is all about and issues like the NCAA.
    1
  13.  @franklance9167  , so no counter argument at all? This is why people laugh at the far left.
    1
  14.  @scottw9267  , those who say that Medicare for all will save money do have this pie in the sky belief. The studies who make this claim leave a lot of factors out. I personally look at history and that shows that the federal government does a poor job at managing these programs. Look at the Community Mental Health Act of 1963 where it caused the mental health situation in the US to be worse.
    1
  15.  @edina7672  , you just can't let anyone be doctors as most simply can't handle it. The reason for low acceptance rate is to make it very hard to get in so the best and brightest get in. Being a doctor is very stressful.
    1
  16.  @bankortimor8488  , what makes you think people will save money?
    1
  17.  @bankortimor8488  , I have read them. They have many red flags and leaves out a lot. I suggest you read the "studies" with an open mind and stop reading headlines.
    1
  18.  @bankortimor8488  , Kyle does not explain anything well. People need to stop looking at him for analysis on these issues. He is far from an expert and sounds more foolish than anything.
    1
  19. Kyle is either dumb or simply lies when it comes to this issue.
    1
  20.  @shagdad76  , they don't hate her. They love her. The more she talks the dumber the left looks.
    1
  21.  @joseph123747  , so no counter argument? AOC does not understand how unemployment is calculated. Why should we take what she says about economics seriously? She has never explained how she plans to pay for these programs.
    1
  22.  @joseph123747  , they do. Knowing how unemployment is calculated is very basic.
    1
  23.  @LavosGaming  , saying she speaks "common sense" is a poor argument. There are strong arguments on both sides of the issues that she pushes. The problem is that she can't argue for her side and neither can her fans. They pull what you pull and say "common sense" because you can't argument for your side. Climate change is a very debatable issue. AOC sounds like a moron when she talks about it. She clearly has not talked to many scientists and engineers on the issue if she talked to any at all.
    1
  24.  @LavosGaming  , in town hall discussion with Bernie Bernie Sanders labeled her as an "expert" in climate change. So someone with an economics degree who became a bartender is an "expert" in climate change? That is why people laugh at her.
    1
  25.  @joseph123747  , climate change is very complex. How will it influence the ecosystem? How much does man play a role? What is the solution?
    1
  26.  @carminedauria-gupta2561  ,hey, kudos to her for not being corrupt, but that doesn't dismiss the fact that she is an idiot.
    1
  27.  @joseph123747  , they haven't been answered.
    1
  28.  @LavosGaming  , deny what? Climate change? It has been happening for over 4 billion years. I am a PhD in physical chemistry. I understand science way more than she does. That is why I feel she is a fool.
    1
  29.  @LavosGaming  , so no counter argument?
    1
  30.  @rrteppo  , the denial of how dumb she is by the left is amazing.
    1
  31.  @rapinjohn1  , I at least know how unemployment is calculated. If you support AOC you have no businesses criticizing people for lack of understanding of economics.
    1
  32.  @b1bbscraz3y  1. He has broken down his point on the healthcare and furniture. Watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SznOanekygY&t=218s 2. What do you do on climate change? The reality is that people will have to move or adjust. That's life. That has been that way all throughout the history of man. He is an intellectual. That is why you just mock him as opposed to actually countering what he says.
    1
  33.  @frenchflag9390  , climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years.
    1
  34.  @b1bbscraz3y  , healthcare requires someone to provide it thus it is a commodity. You ridicule him but that is the reality. I suggest you watch the video I linked, he breaks it down. Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. This is a complex issue. The left just fear mongers screaming the world is on fire when there is far more variables than that to consider. You don't counter what he says. You just mock.
    1
  35.  @TheBlazersfan22  , she doesn't know how unemployment is calculated. She is a moron.
    1
  36.  @sprybug  , not a counter argument. Sorry, but someone who doesn't know how unemployment is calculated I don't want spending my tax dollars.
    1
  37.  @sprybug  , I study science for a living so I have read peer reviewed studies. I read many a day. The fact that you point to Potholer54, a non-scientist, shows how ignorant you are. He is a hack. Tell me, how am I a "denier'? How is Crowder a "denier"?
    1
  38.  @sprybug  , Bernie Sanders labeled her as an expert.
    1
  39.  @sprybug  , what about that chart? What is your point?
    1
  40.  @henrygustav7948  https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/jul/18/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-wrong-several-counts-abou/ https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
    1
  41.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , I agree, the rich are investing and creating wealth thanks to the Trump economy.
    1
  42.  @TheBlazersfan22  , it does make her a moron when she does not know how unemployment is calculated. That is very basic. If she does not understand that how can I trust her on economic issues? It is similar to someone not knowing high school algebra trying to explain Modern Algebra and topics such as Galois theory.
    1
  43.  @sprybug  , she did not deny being an expert when Bernie made that claim. Bernie said it at the beginning. I agree, the worse thing to happen from Charlottesville is that a nice car got ruined.
    1
  44.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , science does not prove anything.
    1
  45.  @sprybug  , Potholer is not a scientist. He has never done research in science nor produced anything. I have read the studies as I study science for a living. You clearly haven't. I don't care what the UN says nor what the rest of the world says. They rely on us. There is a reason why the UN is stationed in the US.
    1
  46.  @henrygustav7948  , I have read a lot of the Peri study, I doubt you have. Obesity is not mentioned when outcomes are brought up. That is hiding things. Other nations have lower obesity rates because of life style choices. Katherine Baicker published the Oregon study in the NEJM (which is left out of the Peri study) which showed when people were given Medicaid their physical health did not improve placing them at higher risk of health problems including death. The reason why is because their lifestyle did not change. Doctors don't worry about tuition when going to college considering how much they earn. There are other factors as well left out of that Peri study such as how do you manage people changing jobs and moving on the psychological end? They make it sound easy that people will be willing to switch jobs and move and all you have to do is give them money to do it. They ignore factors such as families having to move and the issues that are faced there.
    1
  47.  @henrygustav7948  https://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/statements/?list=speaker Seems like she is not too smart either.
    1
  48.  @TheRobster2007  https://www.politifact.com/personalities/alexandria-ocasio-cortez/statements/?list=speaker https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_TYZ6VRNNg&t=190s
    1
  49.  @sprybug  , saying the UN says something is a logical fallacy. I didn't know the UN was ran by a bunch of scientists? How much do you really have to know to be a journalist? People on TYT claim to be journalist, they don't know much (or are very bias, still can't decide which). Potholer cherry picks info and I called him out on it. For example, on the ice caps melting. I pointed out to him that both Crowder and Potholer were wrong. Crowder is correct that in one area they are growing, and Potholer is correct that as a whole they are melting. But Potholer claimed that he is looking at the "whole picture". Looking at the whole picture is trying to understand why one area has ice caps growing and another shrinking along with the overall net. So he is just as foolish as Crowder.
    1
  50.  @TheBlazersfan22  , Trump is wise in economics and understands that the people are best suited in spending money. He understands how businesses operate and knows that high taxes and regulations hurt them and the economy. He understands centralized control is not efficient so he pushes for more state rights. We are seeing his success through the economy.
    1
  51.  @TheBlazersfan22  , you look at his bankruptcies but not at his success. You know, Mariano Rivera blew a save in game 7 of the 2001 World Series, I guess he sucks by your standard. Failure comes with success. The deficit is actually around the norm in terms of percent GDP. Facts don't sit well with you.
    1
  52.  @TheBlazersfan22  , Mariano Rivera is in the hall of fame and the all time saves leader and is credited for the Yankees winning all those World Series. "Trickle down economics" is not an economic term. AOC is an economic illiterate who has no business being in congress.
    1
  53.  @frenchflag9390  , climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. Does man play a role? Yes. But there are other factors at play.
    1
  54.  @henrygustav7948  , I see no mention of how the US has higher rates of obesity which plays a role in healthcare outcomes. Obesity, for the most part, is a lifestyle issue. You cannot ignore life style issues which is why Katherine Baicker's study is so crucial and was published in the journal with the highest impact factor. In her study even when people were made aware of their issues they still had bad physical health because they did not change their lifestyle. I have read that section on changing jobs. They don't handle the psychological end. Just giving them money is not a solution. Moving is difficult for people as that means having to sell your home where the market can change due to different jobs. Buying a new home where that market will change due to increase demand. Moving your kids to another school which can impact them. Moving away from family and friends and so on. Simply saying "we will give them money" is not tackling those issues I just mentioned. Plus, retraining how? They don't say. And why should someone be forced to change jobs? Why should an adult be forced to retrain? You are ignoring that. You are treating people like cattle at that point by telling them to go from point A to point B without care of what they think.
    1
  55.  @mahal3680  , it doesn't take long to write these comments. Plus, I live 1500 miles away from my parents.
    1
  56.  @henrygustav7948  , that 45,000 has been criticize a lot. One, no healthcare system covers everyone where people die due to it. In Australia up to 7000 people die a year while waiting for "elective" surgery. People die in Canada waiting for "elective" heart surgery. So here are the problems with that 45,000 stat 1. What do you have to compare that to? No similar study was done in other nations making that stat what I like to call an "empty stat". You don't know if that 45,000 is high, low, or the norm as you have nothing to compare it to. It is similar to me saying I pay $700 a month in rent. You can't tell off of that if I am paying too much, if I am getting a good deal or if I am paying average. Is it bad that people die? Yes. But reality is that it happens in all nations so you need to compare that 45,000 to something. It would be great is that 45,000 was zero and it would also be great is we can teleport. 2. Those 45,000 are poor and bad health is associated with being poor. Poor people have higher rates of obesity, smoking and type II diabetes, all self inflicted. So you can't say if they die due to lack of access to healthcare or due to being in bad health to begin with. This study https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1212321 Showed that when you gave access to healthcare to people in poverty their physical health did not improve raising the question of will they even live if they had access as they are in bad healthcare to begin with? Maybe they do, but that raises the next question in how long will they live, and what condition will they be in? Read the book entitled "Being Moral" where the author there discusses people who are near death and the many challenges they face. One point he makes is that people look at modern medicine to live another 5 or 10 years but in reality they may live only 5 or 10 months. So if you give access to healthcare to those 45,000 and they live, on average, an extra 3 months, was that a success? How about if during that time they bring a lot of stress to their friends and family? Is that a success? There are arguments to be made in helping those people. There is a strong argument to be made in reducing financial stress on the poor, something included in that study I linked. I support those arguments. I have look at this issue deeply and see the other side of the argument. The problem is that the left hardly has looked at this issue.
    1
  57.  @henrygustav7948  1. Not a comparison. Both studies were done in different ways with different standards. Not saying that neither stat does not hold value, they do. But you can't compare apples to Chevy pickups here, you need to compare apples to apples. 2. People are poor and have bad health mainly due to personal life choices. As I told you with offering them Medicaid, they still had bad physical health. People are offered a free K-12 education and take advantage of it. What makes you think they will take advantage of "free college" and a "free home"? 3. Why? 4. No we can't.
    1
  58.  @henrygustav7948  , there is no stat collected in a similar way to compare that 45,000 to, that is the point.
    1
  59.  @henrygustav7948  1. Saying everyone is "covered" is a very low standard to set. Also, you say in the US healthcare system a "much larger" amounts of people die, what do you base that off of? 2. Most are poor due to life choices. 4. We lack resources.
    1
  60.  @debbiestrauser2252  , I know I don't know everything and I am willing to learn. When someone criticizes AOC she cries about it on Twitter as opposed to having an actual discussion on the issues.
    1
  61.  @henrygustav7948  1. You can't say that as there are other factors at play. They are poor and bad health is associated with those in poverty. The question becomes do they die due to lack of access or due to being in bad health to begin with? As I pointed out in that study I linked, even with access to healthcare their physical health was still bad. And as I said by pointing out the book "Being Mortal", people who are near death have many issues they face and will not really live that much longer. So if you give them access to healthcare and they live a few months longer, is that a success? That is a legit debate to have. 2. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply. 3. The "empty homes" are mainly unlivable homes that you can buy for $100. Yes, we have food waste, we also have an obesity problem with the poor. We lack skilled workers such as doctors, engineers, those in the STEM fields, etc. I work in the STEM field. I work 12 hour days at times. I worked from 9 AM to 3 AM yesterday (that is not a typo, I worked until 3 in the morning) and I came back to work at 9 AM today and I am here collecting more data as I type this. Now I love my work and want a PhD that is actually worth something, but at the same time I do what I do because not many can. There is so much research and progress to be done but not enough skilled workers to do it. These things don't magically appear out of the air.
    1
  62.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , AOC ran in a very blue district and was simply a good look, young girl who promised free shit. If she ran in a moderate area she would be destroyed.
    1
  63.  @deeznutsanyachin2027  , I work odd hours during the day. For example, I just showed up to work now and plan on getting things done.
    1
  64.  @henrygustav7948  1. There are some policies that create unemployment, I agree. Policies like the min. wage for example. But for the most part people are poor because of their life choices. I do agree that offering people help in some way can alleviate stress, but there is a limit. And as that one study I posted showed even with access to healthcare people still were in poor physical health. They were still making bad life choices. 2. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply. The federal government does not control the money supply, period. 3. A bit of a stretch there. 4. We lack skilled workers because people have little desire to become one. Tuition free college will not all of a sudden motivate people to go to college. Also, tuition free college will take away a major important value of college and that is the investment portion of it. Tuition free college is not a smart thing to do and is very challenging in itself. It isn't as easy as you make it sound.
    1
  65.  @henrygustav7948  1. You get inflation with low unemployment due to wage increases. That is due to a lower supply of workers. That is not a bad thing. What the Fed does to alleviate that is to raise interest rates which hinders investment. There is this thing called "natural unemployment" due to people changing jobs, the economy changing, etc. There will always be unemployment. But again, for the most part people are poor due to their lifestyle choices. 2. The Fed acts on its own. That is why it was created. It is there to make unpopular decision for a better economy. 3. There is limited barriers in going to college. When there is a will there is a way. College, like starting a business, is a person investment. That part must always been maintained. If you remove that part of college you make the college degree worthless. You cannot compare high school to college. In high school you are talking about minors receiving a very basic education. In high school you spend around 35 hours a week in school. In college you spend around 15 hours a week in school and cover twice the material. In college the onus is on you to study. In high school they give you a lot of free time in school to do your work and they do a lot of hand holding. In college it is on you to do the work and get things done. College is an investment you make as an adult. College and high school are completely different for great reasons.
    1
  66. The tax cuts are there to grow the economy. So even if the deficit grows at the beginning, with economy growth the deficit will be cut in the future. These programs will not be popular as people don't support tax increases and is it highly unlikely that government will actually save money. Good luck convincing the people that the federal government will save you money.
    1
  67.  @raymarti3  , the tax code should be simplified.
    1
  68.  @sprybug  , care to explain.
    1
  69.  MrBanausos  , the bailouts did not help. The bailouts were in response to the recession which occurred due to the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates low.
    1
  70.  MrBanausos  , interest rates were low during stagflation. That is why Volcker raised them to 21% to slow down inflation.
    1
  71.  MrBanausos  , they were not high. I suggest you read up on economic history a little more.
    1
  72.  MrBanausos  , it isn't my fault that you don't understand basic economics. Provide evidence that Volcker was a racist.
    1
  73.  MrBanausos  , he raised interest rates to stop stagflation.
    1
  74. Great, how about you donate to charity.
    1
  75.  @EG_UIO  , what abuse? When people just resort to name calling I take that as a victory.
    1