Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "For-Profit Health Insurance Companies Are A Nightmare" video.

Angel Fox That book was written by two professors, one who is the chair of their department. They have numerous sources from peer reviewed journals. You can read them yourself. I am not saying they are completely correct nor do I fully agree with them. But it is a reputable source since they cite peer reviewed journals. I thought liberals were in strong favor of academics?
2
Ochser I never say Europe's healthcare is "shite", nor do I say American's is better. I am saying that single payer is not necessarily great and comes with many problems. That is what they book says. They even admit that the US has problems. But it is easier to pull a logical fallacy rather than read the book.
2
CrateofStolenDirt You do know that book was written by two professors and cite several peer reviewed journals. But yeah, just ignore that and pull a logical fallacy. Who needs to read and critically think when you can go off of appeal to emotion rhetoric such as "every other nation has it, so it must work.....weeeee!"
2
To those who are against the book I cite, I find it funny how liberals want "affordable college". That will mean you will have more people exposed to professors like that and resources like that. Is that want you want?
2
Angel Fox Well, you will have more people exposed to information like what is that book and will go against the idea of universal healthcare.
2
Angel Fox Nope. I just find it ironic how I offer people a book to read written by two professors that discuss healthcare across the world. I offer it to people who rip on the US system and other countries, with single payer, have such a great system. When I provide them the book I get the same reaction of "it is from AEI, I am not reading that". Meanwhile, these are the same liberals who want more people to have access to college where in doing so should expose them to the type of thought process that went in writing that book. I see a lot of irony there. So do you not trust a book written by two professors nor do you trust the peer reviewed citations?
2
Ochser Why wouldn't the free market result in health insurance companies giving you the best treatment? You saying it doesn't work like that is not an argument. Also, yes, in Europe you have longer wait times. I am not saying the European system is terrible, I am saying it has problems. The US switching to single payer is just replacing one set of problems with another. That is not a solution.
2
Yeah, I have no problem paying my bills. Seems like Kyle just can't take responsibilities.
2
Because, as a whole, our healthcare is not that bad. The main problem is cost and most intelligent people know that is the result of the federal government getting so involved in healthcare. Also, as a whole, people who usually complain about healthcare the most are the minority that have to deal with it in a way they seen the bad of it in most countries. There are several Canadians that hate their system as well. There is a push to change the NHS. I have no problem with healthcare in the US, but I have never been in a position to get screwed by it. Same goes for others in other countries.
2
CrateofStolenDirt " Tell me, specifically what logical error do you allege I have made?" You said the book came from the American Enterprise Institute and thus said "Summarily dismissed, with a wave of the hand." Why? How about you read the book and try to find an intelligent way to criticize it. As of now all you have shown is that you live in an echo chamber.
1
Illtempo 1980 In the free market system you can get the best because of competition. If a company makes an inferior product than you go someplace else. Your Walmart comparison is poor as they don't make the products they sell.
1
True antitheist2006 When someone refuses to read a book just because it comes from AEI that is a logical fallacy. I am not using "argument of authority" as I disagree with some that is in the book. I don't say the book is 100% correct. I am saying that being from two professors and having peer reviewed citations makes it reliable. Not necessarily correct but reliable. You should learn what real logical fallacies are.
1
CrateofStolenDirt Did you totally miss the point on how they cite peer reviewed citations? The reality is that you have not given a single source at all. Meanwhile, you come at me with a profanity laced comment and called me names. Instead of trying to give a counter argument you just resort to attacks. So while you may feel the source is not credible, and I never said I completely agreed with it, it does have a lot of information and important points. The book also cites all of their sources which you can look at yourself. " AEI is not a trustworthy institution" Never said you can completely trust it, but you can look at the sources they cite. But again, you ignored that. "You are comprehensively incompetent to council anyone on how to identify logical fallacies." Ironic you say that when I had to explain to you what a logical fallacy is and what isn't. So in the end, you have yet to give me a source to counter what I gave you nor will you read what I gave you but instead would rather call me names. So basically it is safe to say I am the more intelligent one here.
1
CrateofStolenDirt On competition, we lack it in healthcare. Consider this 1. Why do so many employers pay with healthcare insurance as opposed to a higher wage? 2. Why does healthcare insurance equal healthcare? Knowing your lack of intelligence I will just answer them to you. It is because of the payroll tax. Because of that is a business were to pay a higher wage they will have to pay a higher tax. Paying through healthcare insurance meant that they can pay employees and avoid those taxes. But that has created problems. Here they are 1. The employees are limited to the insurance the company offers typically a generic one such as women paying for viagra 2. If a person wants to leave a job they risk losing their insurance, so at times they stick with a job they don't like 3. You create a situation where the insurance company has guaranteed customers and thus don't have to have a great plan to begin 4. You remove the customer negotiating power in healthcare If people were allowed to have a higher wage instead they can buy insurance they want that caters to them. They can have companies compete which lowers the price and gives them the best quality out there. And they can use insurance to pay for emergencies when they need at as opposed to things like basic checkups. Just like car insurance pays for car accidents but not oil changes. We don't have that though. You have to understand that for profit does not mean competition.
1
It goes beyond that. People generally don't mind paying taxes and having government spending as long as they can personally see the benefits. That is why smaller, more local government is more efficient and people are more willing to accept that because you as a small community can see if you are getting your money's worth in terms of tax dollars. That was one of the thought processes of the founding fathers. The colonies were paying less taxes than the British. They just didn't like the fact the British was determining the spending instead of the colonies. That is also why they established state rights and the federal income tax was unconstitutional.
1
Police are ran and funded by the local government. Even at that what you are doing is comparable to an emergency. You can go to the ER and they will give you care and bill you later. If a burglar broke into your home you can have the cops (assuming that they make it in time) come and get him, but the cops won't pay for the damage in your home.
1
Daniel V "They DO ask you what your insurance is early on" Not until they take care of you. "However, its involuntarily taxed to everyone in the area " You can vote " But conservatives want healthcare back to the situation described above. " Nope.
1
It doesn't.
1
This seems like a problem of how Kyle does not know how to be an adult. Pay your bills on time and in full, it isn't that hard.
1
We don't need single payer, we need less federal government involved in healthcare. To highlight the problems of healthcare in the US I will ask two questions 1. Why do so many employers pay their employees with healthcare as opposed to healthcare? 2. Why does healthcare insurance equal healthcare?
1
***** I know what it says. You do realize that "for profits" does not necessarily mean "private"? To me, we can highlight our problems with healthcare in two questions 1. Why do so many employers pay with healthcare insurances as opposed to a higher wage? 2. Why does healthcare insurance equal healthcare? The problem is that we don't have a private system. We have a for profit system with a large influence from the federal government.
1
***** It is relevant. We have a for profit system where the consumers, in this case those with healthcare insurance, have not control over the product they have. It is similar to a monopoly. That is for profit, but the government has set up a system where there is limited competition thus insurance companies can do what they want. " As for 1 while I'd prefer higher wages, I'd bet those higher wages couldn't afford health insurance (granted I don't know much about this particular reason)." I bet they could because it will force insurance companies to compete which lowers prices and raises quality. Also, you can get a plan that suits you. " As for 2 what the hell is the point of health insurance if you don't get proper healthcare from it" Insurance is if something extreme happens. Car insurance will pay for an accident, but won't pay for an oil change. Health insurance should be limited to, or at least you should have the choice of limiting it to emergencies. Something like a routine checkup or pregnancy should be out of pocket.
1
True antitheist2006 It is more complicated than that. Also, we don't spend 4.5 trillion dollars on defense.
1