Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Justice Democrat Wants To Revive FDR's Second Bill Of Rights" video.

  1. People who support the "Second Bill of Rights" have no idea the thought process behind the first. The Bill of Rights were to limit government. The "Second Bill of Rights" were to give government more power.
    5
  2. The "Second Bill of Rights" is expansion of the powers of the government so they can become further corrupt. The first Bill of Rights was to limit government.
    4
  3. Ishmael, it is just pure ignorance along with their firmly held religious like belief in their ideas. Just trying to correct people in that healthcare is not a right angers them. It isn't a right. Pursuing it is, but you don't have a right to healthcare. That doesn't mean the government can't provide or pay for it, it just means it isn't a right.
    4
  4. Fredrik, a right is something the government cannot take away without due process. You have the right to bear arms, but the government does not give you a gun. You have a right to free speech, but the government does not give you a TV show.
    3
  5. "Yes, and the second Bill of Rights is to limit corporations." The people can limit corporations by simply not giving them business. For as bad as Walmart is I never had them put a gun to my head forcing me to do things. "According to this troll everyone that doesn't accept the proven fraud of Austrian "economics" is somehow economically illiterate" Many experts support Austrian economics.
    2
  6. kennedy crouch, corporations have zero power. Government has power. All a corporation can do is offer you a job and/or a product. That's it. It "controls" our government when government has power that can be bought.
    2
  7. " many experts are fucking idiots who have been teaching the same economic theories since 1900 even though capitalism is an abject failure" Capitalism has not failed. "if you honestly believe corporations don't have power it's because you're an idiot with no eyeballs" What powers do corporations have?
    2
  8. "corporations are able to funnel unlimited amounts of money into the political system through super pacs and they are currently lobbying the government to loosen restrictions on individual donations so they can just give that money directly to the politicians they support." And if politicians were limited in power than they can't be bought. That is a problem of government having too much power, not corporations. "capitalism HAS failed, time and time again, " When? The Great Depression happened because of government spending and regulations. "THAT is what happens when the government focuses" Do you even know what capitalism is?
    2
  9. "Capitalism indeed can't work because it simply needs to destroy the environment in order to remain profitable" You destroy the environment you have no production, period.
    2
  10. Accelerationist, when did I ever say I hate unions? Please point that out. Now you are assuming things. You assume that I hate unions which is not true. I actually support unions. I just feel they can become corrupt just like businesses. In a free market unions are crucial. But again, please point out where I ever said I hate unions.
    2
  11. "actually there were like 4 or 5 economic crises during the gilded age, because capitalism Does Not Work" And there were around that much after FDR's time with our higher taxes and regulations that we supposedly had. What's your point? Recessions happen. How we recover is key. . "so it's fine to you that a handful of bankers can play fast and loud with everyone's money and fuck up the economy so they can come out of it with billions of dollars?" No, and in a free market they wouldn't. In a free market that business will fail causing those bankers to go broke. It was government that bailed them out and made them rich.
    2
  12. "A real economy would put the ecology first. It would meet human basic needs and beyond without overreaching planetary boundaries. What we have now is more like an anti-economy." So it is anti-economy to develop cars that are safer and get better gas mileage? It is anti-economy to have technology that conserves resources? It is anti-economy to develop computers that create E-books that saves paper? It is anti-economy to create iPods that means less CDs are being made? You are not making sense. Capitalism is about getting the most out of our resources as you can't afford to have waste in a competitive market.
    2
  13. So where is Bernie Sanders in all of this? Also, didn't many of Bernie like candidates lose last election? So much for being popular.
    1
  14. Once again I see a comment thread of people saying Ben Shapiro is wrong, or stupid, or something equivalent to that without justifying their position.
    1
  15. "or he's saying some retarded shit like healthcare is the same as furniture;" It is. They are both commodities as in someone has to provide it. I know this may be hard for you to believe but the government does not have a magic wand like Kyle said they do.
    1
  16. life boats, I will be fair, I don't agree with that statement. I never said that I agreed with Ben Shapiro 100%. But everyone says something stupid or wrong. The point is you need to justify it. For example, when Kyle said in his debate against DP that no one in other countries die due to lack of healthcare. That is 100% wrong and I have peer reviewed papers showing that. The fact that people call out Ben Shapiro but than praise Kyle is hypocritical or ignorance.
    1
  17. "when did Kyle EVER say that?" In the video entitled "Kyle Debates Conservative Youtuber Razorfist on Drunken Peasants" Around 15 minutes Kyle starts to talk about healthcare. He is wrong in that many have died waiting for "elective" heart surgery. He said "the people in Canada disagree". Read the paper "True versus reported waiting times for valvular aortic stenosis surgery" in Can J Cardiol. People do die. For Kyle to dismiss that idea or not know it is ignorance on his part.
    1
  18. "Oh yea, because even though it would decrease the price" Actually it won't decrease the price unless you lower the quality in some way like other countries do. Do you think doctors are going to work for free?
    1
  19. "Yea, because Cenk is a shit debater lol; Kyle would bring all those facts he brought against Razorfist and Shapiro would be powerless to stop him. " What facts? All Kyle will say is "that's not true" or "you are wrong" or "that's bullshit". Kyle is a crap debater. Razorfist is a Youtuber who does video game commentary. He is not a political analysis. Why doens't Kyle debate Steven Crowder? Oh, that's right. According to Kyle Crowder denies climate change which is not true at all. Crowder has said many times that climate change is happening. This is not to support Shapiro or Crowder. This is to show that Kyle says many things that are wrong and I call them out often with justification. But yet you are so quick to trust him but rip on Shapiro without justification.
    1
  20. " It doesn't lower the quality; what is your source that proves that it does?" Read the book "The Business of Health" by Prof. Robert Oshfeldt and Prof. John Schneider Countries with universal healthcare have lower quality with advanced procedures. They have shortcomings as well. Not saying it is terrible, just saying it has shortcomings.
    1
  21. "Oh yea? Well I know of a Canadian who was in and out of major surgery in seven hours." Two things. 1. How long did they have to wait before they got into surgery? 2. Your one anecdotal story does not debunk the fact that people do die on waiting lists.
    1
  22. " Lower quality with advanced procedures? Is it only with advanced procedures?" The US is number 1 in cancer survival rates. "Why I ask is because this could be due to several factors beyond just single payer and I don't want you being dishonest with me here," I agree there are several factors at play. The main thing is that in the US we lead the world in research and innovation in healthcare. Our for profit system pushes for that. Also, in advanced procedures we are very strong due to the profit motive. Other countries struggle in research and advanced procedures.
    1
  23. " WE HAVE WAITING TIMES IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TOO and yes people die on them." I agree. The fact is that in every system we lack supplies. To think that we can just get single payer and everyone gets care is simply not true. To me the evidence is clear that a for profit system motivates workers to produce more leading to more research and innovation which progresses our healthcare system a lot. Single payer system struggles at that as why do work when you don't benefit from it?
    1
  24. Red Hood, what you mean "gamble with people's lives"? " If someone finds the end all be all cure for cancer that doesn’t mean he should be allowed to sell it at an outrageous price." When producing it is expensive then yes, we should. If we can produce a lot of it than the price will drop. That is where Shapiro's furniture comparison is spot on. More expensive furniture takes more time and resources to produce. Same with healthcare. It would be great to have the cure all pill, but that doesn't exist. It will be great to have too many doctors, but that isn't the case. Doctors also don't do 10 years of medical school to earn pennies.
    1
  25. "That statement is frustrating to read.  "It won't decrease the price unless you lower the quality" an absolute claim without any supporting evidence " It is supported by evidence. The US leads the world in research and innovation in healthcare. Disease are always evolving and R&D in healthcare is challenging. Many drugs never see the market thus it is expensive. Other countries simply don't have R&D and thus their healthcare quality suffers. They only do well because the US continues to produce. But if you were to lower prices than something has to give. Either cut R&D or increase wait times. "So there's no money to be saved in medical device fees, pharmaceutical costs, claims billing overhead, corporate profits and dividends, and administrative waste?" Medical devices are expensive as they are not easy to make. Also, many have to be personalized. As for administrative waste, that does not exist. A lot of that money is spent saving money as in fraud prevention for example. But I guess you are supporting more fraud and lesser quality equipment. BTW, I so science research for a living. I know how much equipment costs. So much so that we are salvaging a lot of old instruments for parts to save money. Hospitals can't do that. They need top of the line equipment unless you want lower quality.
    1
  26. Seadalgo 1. Public research grants in academics produce very little overall. Many projects, like mine (I have a NIH grant) won't produce anything. It carves our more information in the field, but it never produces anything directly. In the private sector they produce the actual drugs in mass quantities. 2. Many doctors don't take medicare. As for administration cost, insurance companies use that to save money as in fraud prevention and disease awareness. Medicare can just pass disease awareness to the CDC. As a whole, though, a lot of money does come from the government for healthcare. The US spends $1 trillion a year at the federal level. The idea the left wants in having more federal government involved in healthcare is happening and has been for decades, and prices are going up. The reason why is because healthcare is complex. The idea that a single payer system will save money is 100% not true unless you lower the quality, as in less research. A lot is spent in research as it is complex. We want good drugs and procedures and technology. In order to do that you have to pay. People who feel that single payer will lower prices are, in my opinion, too ignorant to discuss this issue.
    1
  27. South Africa has a right to a home in their constitution. They still have homeless people.
    1
  28. kennedy crouch, these JD individuals are socialists. They are economic illiterates who have no business being in politics as they do not understand the issues.
    1
  29. "Aren't you the one who tries to sell people on the evils of universal healthcare with a AEI paper that is a complete LIE?" How is it a lie? They give all of their methods and citations from peer reviewed sources. Point to me the lies. I have pointed out the lies from Kyle whom many on here agree with. He said no one dies in systems with single payer due to waiting lists which is not true at all. I also cited a peer reviewed paper there. But again, how was that book lying?
    1
  30. Fredrik Herre, yes, the Constitution is a piece of paper that people need to enforce. But in the US rights are things that the government cannot take away without due process. You have the right to pursue healthcare but you don't have a right to someone's service. If you make healthcare a right than it becomes similar to a right to a jury. If you are called to jury duty and refuse you go to jail. If you are a doctor and refuse to treat a patient then you will go to jail if healthcare is a right. You have now enslaved doctors. "What stops healthcare from becoming a right if it's put in an amendment?" Two reasons 1. We don't want to enslave healthcare providers 2. Our rights are there to limit government and give us power over the government. Not give government power. On the second part, the 1st amendment was to allow us to freely criticize the government. The 4th amendment prevent the government form searching our private homes. The 5th amendment was to prevent the government from taking our property. "Your examples are really bad. There is actually public broadcasting, so the government does give you a TV show" Not true at all as I don't have my own show. "You can exercise your right to free speech without watching or being in a TV show." I can get my word out louder on TV. But again, I don't have my own show as neither do you. There is a process to do it.
    1
  31. "Ridiculous. Most corporations spend more on advertising than R&D and production put together." Not true, but I guess believe what you want. "The idea that consumers will just stop buying their crap is pure delusion. We know from extensive research that advertising has a massive impact on our psychology and consumer behavior." Yeah, and? Whose fault is that? Maybe the people should weigh their options. However, with the internet now people have more information about companies. This is something I am currently study in my MBA course. It is a marketing class. "By the way, your "free" market is supposed to be comprised of informed consumers making rational decisions. " We have this with the internet. But to counter that, your government is supposed to be voted by informed voters making rational decisions. If you are saying the people are informed do you want them voting for your politicians? "Corporations try to undermine markets through advertising, " And government uses power and force. "We need to abolish corporations altogether. " So punish success and kill jobs? "The data is in." What data? " And the consensus among "economists" is actually against the Austrian school by the way. " Not true, but again, believe what you want.
    1
  32. "there were no regulations on the market during the gilded age. " Not really. Unions pushed for safety and mining deaths dropped over years. http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-coal-mining-deaths-in-the-us-1900-2013/ "what the fuck do you mean "regulation caused the great depression" ???? anybody with a grasp of history knows that's fucking stupid" FDR was literally killing cattle to keep food prices high.
    1
  33. Accelerationist, you call me a troll as you can't counter what I am saying. I just now gave an example of how mining deaths were dropping prior to the 20s and 30s meaning working conditions were improving. The idea that things were terrible prior to FDR and that caused the Great Depression is simply not true. All throughout history we have had many recessions, but only two took over 5 years to recover from. The Great Depression and the Great Recession. There were also the only times where the federal government tried to "fix" the economy with massive spending. Why was it under Obama and FDR we had a terrible economy but massive spending?
    1
  34. "being raised to think that way myself, i know the poor guy is frantically trying to justify his beliefs to himself." Well that is not true. I used to be like you and only take things on face value and stick with talking points. I now think critically and deeply on the issues. I just showed you how mining deaths were dropping prior to the 20s and 30s. But according to you things were terrible. But tell me, how did lack of regulation cause the depression?
    1
  35. kennedy crouch, so you don't support economic growth? The uptick in stocks is growth. With growth comes recessions. In 1921 we had a major recession. The federal government did nothing and within a year we recovered. Recessions are a part of growth and as history shows when the federal government is hands off we recovered quickly. " bankers used to approve loans that could never be paid back because they make more money when they take more risk." That sounds familiar, and what did FDR and Hoover do? Bail out the banks. Sound familiar?
    1
  36. "apparently he completely ignores the fact that during the 1950s and the 1960s the US had the biggest economic growth period in recorded history of any nation ever. " That is because we just got done with WWII and every other nation was rebuilding where we weren't. We were ahead of the game. And actually federal government spending as a percent of GDP dropped. It was at 19% in 1953 and than dropped down to 15% in 1956. It never got to 18% until 1966. But hey, who needs facts? " and very high tax rates on the rich. " Well no one paid those high rates. In 1967 there were 155 Americans who earned over $200,000 that year and paid $0 in federal taxes. But again, who need facts? "Not to mention the fact that the better working conditions he cites were because of reforms achieved by progressives, something he's against. " They were achieved through unions. But again, I guess facts are pointless. "And he still refuses to address climate change" Well now you are changing the subject. However, climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years. The questions are 1. How much is man playing a role? It is simply by the 2nd law of thermodynamics. But by how much? 2. Is it even bad. Unless you don't support evolution the ecosystem has evolved in the past and little suggest it won't continue to do so. But who needs science?
    1
  37. Accelerationist, it seems like I irritated you as you have nothing but name calling and strawman. I continue to give you my counter points where you ignore mine. "A few years ago the UN did a comprehensive study about the costs that all major capitalist industries inflict on the environment. They wanted to find out what these corporations actually had to pay for all these negative externalities. It turns out that if those corporations really had to pay for all the damage, none of them would be profitable." I would like to see that study, the authors, the data, the analysis, etc. Or you can tell me. "Capitalism itself is the problem. " How so? The device you are typing on now is a capitalist invention. Youtube is from capitalism. The most growth has come from capitalism. "The only viable solution is to transition towards a scientifically managed resource-based economy. We have the technology now to produce and distribute an equitable abundance for everyone on this planet without the need for exchange, " What? You clearly do not know what you are talking about? What technology? What resources? And how are those resources developed? What quality? Really? "What we focus on now is so-called "economic efficiency", which is an Orwellian term used by the business world. It just means lowering costs as much as possible through wasteful competition and the brutal exploitation of cheap labor overseas." That labor overseas exist simply because they lack resources and are not developed. Now how do you deliver resources from the US over there? Please explain that. This ought to be good. And in doing so, how do you expect US citizens to cut what they have now?
    1
  38. kennedy crouch, you do know that bees are not the only ones who pollinate? And you do know that many species have gone extinct long before man was on earth?
    1
  39. "god you are so mind numbingly stupid" And I can see you can't support you case when challenged.
    1
  40. "The bad news is that we only have a few decades left." Really? I feel you are a little crazy. Nothing suggests that is the case.
    1
  41. "and yes, banks giving loans on margin DOES sound familiar, which is why they need to be regulated" It is regulated. They give out bad loans, they go under as a business, a new one that can actually run well buys them out and replaces them. Where is government in that situation?
    1
  42. " that HAS to be the reason conservatives are so against education you know? " I am getting a PhD in physical chemistry. "as long as they're very angry about black and brown people and gay people and women" Identity politics at its finest.
    1
  43. "And now we're done whyamimrpink78. With your delusional statement about climate change you have lost all credibility. Who needs science?" Well me as it is my career. I am pursuing a PhD in physical chemistry. "The scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change is overwhelming. We are causing it," The "consensus" has been debunked. Climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years, unless you are a young earth theorist. "and it's incredibly bad for the biosphere. Every single reputable scientific institution on this planet accepts that conclusion" That is not true as that is not settled in the scientific community, the community I am a part of. " I suggest you look up the amazing body of peer-reviewed papers if you need evidence" How about you link me some? As a PhD student I have access to all of them. " And I'm not even going to entertain your insane comment about climate change and evolution." So you also don't support evolution?
    1
  44. Accelerationist, all you are giving are talking points. You talk about the "consensus" and "it's incredibly bad" and "every single reputable scientific institution" and so on. But you never give names. You never list what papers I should read. Think about that. I am a scientist myself. I understand the field. If you give me papers I can read them and give you my educated opinion on them. But you don't even do that. And you call me delusional?
    1
  45. Accelerationist, I think you are crazy. You are preaching about the end of the world like you are a part of a cult or a religion.
    1
  46. kennedy crouch, if they are so obvious than you should be able to explain it in detail with data to back it up. You can't. I gave you data and resources. You just preach "regulations" and "taxes". You same I am stuck in a loop but you keep saying the same things over and over again.
    1
  47. "Have a nice life." According to you we are all going to die anyway in a few decades, might as well party it up now.
    1
  48. " He wants me to name all the scientific organizations that accept anthropogenic climate change? There are literally hundreds of them. You can easily find a list from a credible source on the internet." Where should I look? Fox News? At this point you are a fraud. You can't list any. "He's supposedly a lover of science but he never bothered to look it up? " I understand science. The field of climate change is complex ranging from physicists to biochemist to ecologists and so on. Where do I start? You tell me? Do I look in JPCB? Physics Revew A? PCCP? Blood? What journal? " He needs to wait for other people to cite them? " You are the one making the claim. "This guy is working on a PhD in physical chemistry? Where? At Trump University? Lol! " Actually at an accredited university. I am developing methods to study structure and dynamics of biological materials. I won't tell you my name as for the weirdos out there, but here is a title of a review that is related to my work "Watching Proteins Wiggle: Mapping Structures with Two-Dimensional Infrared Spectroscopy" In Chemical Reviews. Read that review, it is strongly related to my work. "Seriously, this guy is a bad scientist to say the least. Not to mention the fact that he constantly uses an argument from authority." Really? You were saying "consensus" and " Every single reputable scientific institution". That is not argument for authority? Which, I will remind you, you never listed any. " I don't give a shit what his PhD is. I have the evidence on my side. " That you refuse to list. You simply tell me to look it up. "And I'm crazy? Did he even read the recent study published by 15.000 scientists that warn us about impending environmental collapse? " Published what? Where? " He only cares about money." I make $23,000 a year as a graduate student. In case you did not know graduate students are not living the life of luxury. I care about information, having knowledge and critical thinking. That involves being able to support your stance.
    1
  49. Accelerationist, tell me how do we distribute resources all across the earth to people? Also, tell me what we should do to combat climate change? These are two areas you covered you feel we need to do. Tell me your ideas in handling those things.
    1
  50. "We're not making stuff that lasts" Cars today last longer than ever. Computers are faster and last longer. We are making things that last. "We have the technology to create a sustainable abundance." Of what? Let us say food. Now how do you get that food to another part of the world? And with that how do you combat climate change at the same time?
    1
  51. ""corporation's have zero power" you literally don't know anything." What powers do corporations have? Please list them. I have never seen a corporation use force to make someone do something. I never seen a corporation force others to work for them or force people to give them money. "did you really bring up the "climate change has been happening for 4 billion years" argument?" What? You don't think climate change has been happening for over 4 billion years? Are you a young earth theorist?
    1
  52. When is Bernie Sanders going to endorse the party? This is a fraudulent organization to keep Kyle and Cenk relevant. Kyle is losing viewers, he needs to eat somehow.
    1
  53. "And yet the Founding Fathers also said that no Constitution should last more than a decade or so." Not true.
    1
  54. donHooligan, slaves were forced to work and were treated as properties. For as bad as Walmart is I never heard of them holding a gun to someone's head forcing them to work.
    1
  55. "if you live in a culture that REQUIRES money, you are REQUIRED to work. having a full time job, yet qualifying for food stamps = slave wages" You also have the ability to work hard and move up.
    1