Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "THE SWAMP: Big Pharma Spent $468,108 Per Member Of Congress" video.

  1. Seeing that is a major reason why I do not want single payer healthcare at the federal level. It will just lead to more corruption.
    3
  2. TheUlitmateBeing01, so if someone earns a higher income then you their opinion does not matter? Why? That is similar to people saying that people who are poor or people who do not pay taxes should not vote. Also, I earn $23,000 a year.
    3
  3. Ej Jones, this won't happen in capitalism.
    1
  4. Social democracy gives more power to congress. The result will be worse.
    1
  5. It is a problem. That is why I support limiting the powers of the federal government. I find it funny, and sad that ultra leftists complain about a corrupt government but then turns around and pushes to have that same government run your healthcare.
    1
  6. "And the amount of people that recognize it as a problem, and yet refuse to see the severity and/or refuse to act on it, is even bigger." Yes, which is why I support limiting the federal government and giving more power to the states.
    1
  7. " A corrupt politician is a corrupt politician at any and all levels. " At the state level you have more control of government. How many local politicians are millionaires compared to congress members? Even the ultra leftest boy wonder Comrade Sanders earned a million last year. What percentage of congress can you vote for? Now what percentage of you local government you can vote for? You have a larger voice at the local level. And if you don't like it you can move and remain a US citizen. "The problem isn't locality, the problem is who is in office and who they REALLY work for." And how many of those in office can you vote for? I hate Nancy Pelosi, but I can't vote for her. ". A smaller federal government won't solve that, " A limited federal government will. "corporations will just hunker down on governors more so than they do now." I met my governor, Never met the president. I met both candidates for mayor last election.
    1
  8. If the federal government has the power to control healthcare then it will cater to big companies with money. You will be getting drugs and care from companies that government endorses as opposed to the company that is the best. The company the government endorses is the one that donated the most money. Think of it like this. If you do not want your 16 year old son to race your new Porsche, do you give him the keys and tell him not to do it, or do you just refuse to give him the keys and instead give him the keys to a 2000 Grand Prix? By not giving your son the keys to the Porsche means he won't race it at all. Giving him the keys means he can drive off someplace and race it while you are busy doing other things. It is the same with government. Limit government's power and it can't be corrupted.
    1
  9. "Why the fuck can´t you force stronger anti-corruption measures" Who is going to enforce it? The government? The same politicians that put the law in place? The Constitution was there to limit government, especially the federal government. There is a desire to have government, but you have to keep it as local as possible. The more local it is the easier it is to control. You want "anti-corruption" laws at the federal level when you can only vote for 2 senators and a handful of members in the house. There are comments here complaining about Ted Cruz as if he took money, but how many viewers of Kyle can vote for Ted Cruz? I am all for keeping the powers out of the federal government's had to begin with. It is similar to a gun and a kid. Keep the knife and a kid. Keep the knives away from the kids and they won't cut themselves or others. You put them in reaching distance someone will get hurt. Keep the power out of the federal government hands and they won't abuse it.
    1
  10. VitalVampyr, do you really want this corrupt federal government running your healthcare? Give me an honest answer. And why? Do you think that by giving the federal government power to control your healthcare will mean they will do what is best for you? Or do you feel they will worry about themselves first?
    1
  11. Joshua Zapata, the federal government won't go straight to single payer because doing so will lead to an economic collapse due to many jobs being lost. But many politicians said Obamacare was a step towards it. It isnt' that they are against single payer, it is that they are going to ease towards it.
    1
  12. "Someone is going to have power, there can be no vacuum of it." I agree. The more local government is the easier it is to control. You at a local community can see if government is working for you, and if it isn't you have a larger voice. You can also move and remain a US citizen. "Look at your local governments and see how much worse they are than congress, " Local politicians are not millionaires for the most part. I can vote for all of my local politicians. I can't vote for the vast majority of congress.
    1
  13. Jace, we don't have a free market healthcare system. When well over half of the country is dependent on their employer for healthcare and can't pick their own plan then that is not the free market.
    1
  14. Keenan Mert, Medicare and Medicaid are losing money. Even at that they are not great programs as people still need private options to subsidize it and many doctors don't use it. "Once we have a single payer, there will be no price gouging," We will be at the mercy of the federal government and the companies that endorses them. It is similar to if we had single payer cell phones and the only company we can work with was Sprint. No AT&T, Cricket, Verizon, only Sprint because Sprint donated enough money to the politicians to endorse their plans. Or if we had single payer grocery stores and the only store we had was Walmart because they had the money to give Congress to make laws in their favor. No Hy Vee or Raleys or Safeway, just Walmart. And then both Walmart and Sprint jacks up their prices or lower their quality. This money was given to Congress by Big Pharma to create laws in Big Pharma's favor. If Congress did not have that power then Big Pharma can't benefit. The only way they can succeed is by catering to customers.
    1
  15. Mrmedia046, big government is the root of the problem.
    1
  16. Keenan Mert, I support government. I support a public option in healthcare. I just feel it should be ran at the state. The more local government is the more control the people have. Government should serve the people. To ensure that you have to keep it local and limit its power. It is all listed in the Constitution.
    1
  17. Allan, Canada's system has shortcomings. To say it works better then the US is a lie.
    1
  18. "You're an idiot, you don't think we have a free market healthcare system??? " We don't. "ACA is a right wing think tank baby" Doesn't matter. It forces people to by healthcare insurance. That is not free market. If a law forced you to buy a car is that the free market? "your employer signs up with a private insurer from the free market." They do so because of the payroll tax. It is a tax free way of paying employees. I rather earn a higher wage and buy my own plan. But the payroll tax prevents that. The free market is allowing businesses to pay with any method they want and having consumers buy plans that they want or choosing not to.
    1
  19. "People on Medicare seem largely satisfied with their healthcare, " Most people are satisfied with their healthcare, that is why reform is hard. In the big picture we are a developed nation and people are fine. That still does not mean it is the best route to go. " Thus I would probably be more satisfied with my healthcare if I had Medicare rather than a private insurer." Again, doesn't matter as it is losing money and many doctors don't take Medicare. Also, medicare is restricted to a particular group, not the entire population. "Plus those malignant politicians won't be able to enrich themselves by denying me healthcare" Why not? Also, they can give you healthcare, it will just be low quality care. Remember, the government gives you roads full of pot holes. "I'm mercifully free of your "government is inherently evil" mentality so I have no problems with single-payer ideologically." I never said it is "inherently evil", you said that. I said that it can be corrupted if we don't control it. To control it we have to keep it as local as possible. There are many benefits to government, but you have to realize it is fully capable of being corrupt and evil. Tell me why do you want this corrupt federal government to run your healthcare?
    1
  20. "Medicare for all would ELIMINATE the need for price negotiation for drugs" Yeah, because the largest bidder will buy out the government to where we use only their drugs no matter the price or quality. You will have Big Pharma paying congress money to sell their products and nothing else.
    1
  21. Allan, that book talks about life expectancy at the beginning. A lot contributes to life expectancy, not just healthcare.
    1
  22. TheUltimateBeing01, the reason why employers pay with healthcare insurance as opposed to a higher wage is because of the payroll tax. With the payroll tax paying with a higher wage means they will pay more taxes. But with benefits they are taxed free. It would be easier to pay a higher wage and better for the employee as they can pick a plan they want. But the payroll tax hinders that. Thus it is not a free market system. You have to look at that. A tax, the payroll tax in this case, hindered the ability for consumers to buy a plan they want.
    1
  23. plaid13, what makes you say that? What will prevent current doctors and drug companies from raising prices? Now they have more customers. What will motivate drug companies to do research and innovate? They have guaranteed customers. How will government negotiate lower prices?
    1
  24. Allan, the WHO's ranking was criticized so much that they have not done another one in over a decade. It compared the US and Canada to Malta and San Marino. Also, there are many factors to life expectancy. There difference between the US and Canada in those numbers are so minute it is considered noise.
    1
  25. Jace, Trump ran on the idea that politicians are corrupt. He ran on the idea that the federal government has been getting larger and the politicians have been getting richer which is true.
    1
  26. Mrmedia046, before FDR federal government spending was 7% of GDP. After WWII it was 14% of GDP. Now it is 20% of GDP. In 1950 defense spending was 10% of GDP, now it is 4%. So federal government got bigger while defense spending dropped. Politicians are getting richer. Healthcare and colleges are becoming more expensive. We have $20 trillion in debt. The federal government is too large.
    1
  27. "So having a US infant mortality rate comparable to some third world countries " We don't have that. Also, is it valid to compare the US and Canada to Malta and San Marino?
    1
  28. Allan, not to be rude but I study stats and data for a living. You are just looking at raw data.
    1
  29. Jace, how is Trump corrupt? Also, I do not blame Trump and Obama. People like you wanted the federal government to have that power. I said no. When someone tells you the pan is hot and not to touch it but you do and get burned then you do not blame the pan, you blame yourself.
    1
  30. Joshua Zapata, Trump ran on policies. And policies he is pushing now I support. I love his tax plan as it is simplified which is what we need. No more loop holes. I like DeVos as his education pick as they are giving more power to the states which is what we need. Your state gets to decide what to teach, not the federal government. How is that corrupt? Also, defense spending has been dropping for over 60 years. We spend more money on education and healthcare.
    1
  31. Jace, how is Trump corrupt? You never explained that. Just saying he is does not make it so.
    1
  32. "Trump is corrupt to the core! " How is Trump corrupt? Give me examples,
    1
  33. "I finally figured out why you're against the minimum wage, against medicare for all and an ardent Trump supporter. You are an upper middle class business owner, aren't you?" I am a PhD candidate that earns $23,000 a year. "The ONLY reason you like Trump is because he cut taxes for assholes like YOU! " He is cutting taxes for everyone.
    1
  34. "The fact is, government does not necessarily mean bad, " I never said it does. You are saying that. I support government. I work for the government. I work for the school district and as a grad student I work for government. I just feel that we the people need to control it. I feel that we need to keep it as local as possible and follow the Constitution so the people can control it instead of the government controlling us. I support many government programs. You are so radical that anytime anyone suggests there is a problem with government you get all butt hurt.
    1
  35. ch33tos sesh, that first article does not explain how Trump is corrupt nor explains what is in the law. Also, Trump's tax plan is cutting for all.
    1
  36. Jace, his cabinet picks were not corrupt. Obama blocked reporters as well. Blocking reporters who lie is not being corrupt . Disagree with a man is not the same as him being corrupt.
    1
  37. "Don't forget he launched 50 tomahawk missiles at Syria without Congress approval " How is that different then Obama, Bush, or Clinton? " He sold $110 billions of weapons to Saudi Arabia " Which is common. You develop a civil relationship with other nations that way and if they decided to become hostile we will know what they have. It is similar to why we train armies from other nations.
    1
  38. "on the first article, You know how pharmaceutical companies are blackmailing governments and effectively extorting citizens in order to boost their profits?" Again, what happened? That article does not explain anything.
    1
  39. "You think the profits are used to do research or innovate? you really dont know how the health care system in this country works. Most research and innovation is done funded by government grants and charity donations." In healthcare best research is done by the drug companies. Yes, most research is funded by the government, but that involves a lot of academic research. "The government could negotiate lower prices... the same way EVERY other modern country on the planet does it with single payer health care. " And their care is rationed. But what makes you think the corrupt federal government will be negotiating prices when a big pharma company comes in and donates millions to congress not to? " You act like this is some crazy new concept. Its been done in tons of countries and it works the same in all of them. " And those countries have smaller populations, different cultures, and the US leads the world in research and innovation in healthcare and technology for a reason. "When the government pays all the medical bills they can say hey we want to pay less" Or just raise the debt ceiling, or just give out low quality care. Anything to cater to their donors. "You dont like it? well you lose millions of customers and go to a competing company for those drugs." Or that drug company donates millions go get their politicians in office to change the rules so that company earns billions. But say the government sets their foot down and refuses to pay more. What will stop drug companies and doctors from just giving out lower quality products and services?
    1
  40. plaid13, think about it. Do you really think doctors and drug companies are going to be willing to take on more customers but not get paid more?
    1
  41. Proud Liberal, good for you. I am a doctorate student. In two years I will earn around that much and have the ability to move up and be my own boss.
    1
  42. Pro Gun Leftist, I have my own one bedroom apartment, a reliable car, and eat three square meals a day. I am two years away from earning a PhD where I will be earning around 4 to 5 times more then what I do now. I am not poor as I manage my money well and I am working to earn more.
    1
  43. TheUltimateBeing01, you don't have to believe me. I don't support the min. wage because basic economics and studies have showed that it does not help the economy.
    1
  44. TheUltimateBeing01, the min. wage hurt Seattle. You will not find a study that shows the min. wage helps the economy. Even Christina Romer admits that.
    1
  45. https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/files/NBER%20Working%20Paper.pdf It hurt Seattle.
    1
  46. T A Ship, do you have any other studies? There are a lot of sources out there that are not peer reviewed. That still does not mean it is not credible. All that means is that it should not be used in academics.
    1
  47. Even at that, the min. wage and Seattle argument is rather weak. Seattle is very business friendly with low taxes which is why there are so many companies their such as Boeing and Amazon. That is what drives the economy. The state of Washington, though, has a teenage unemployment above the national average for a reason. There isn't anything out there that suggests that raising the min. wage grows the economy. When broken down there is not one single good reason to even have a min. wage.
    1
  48. T A Ship, I am a PhD candidate. For my research and papers I publish I do use peer reviewed sources. But this is a youtube comment discussion, not my thesis or even one of my papers. I will say this, even if not peer reviewed those individuals have their name on that paper, with that university having their name on that paper, meaning their credibility is somewhat at stake. I am preparing a poster for a conference in a week and even though it is only on preliminary results, I am being careful in what I put on it and what I will say as there are other professors, one that does work similar to what I do, that will be there and judging me. I will also say this, I have seen papers get published even after going through the peer reviewed processed but were still bad. Now in the big picture those are few and far between, but it can exist.
    1
  49. "There's other reports that it worked and businesses are expanding. " And those reports did not come from a university. Even at that a few success is not a reason to not look at the failures. And what was the situation of those businesses before hand? There is a lot to this, but when you break it down the min. wage has never helped the poor and has never improved the economy . You want a great example, look at 2007.
    1
  50. Cegesh, when you account for PPP Australia does not have that high of a min. wage.
    1
  51. TheUltimateBeing01, businesses simply can't afford higher wages. That is the fact. Also, you are simply looking at money. Money does not drive the economy, wealth does. You have to produce. Increasing the min. wage does not increase production. Workers and machines can only work so fast.
    1
  52. Except this wasn't capitalism. If we had single payer healthcare this will be a lot worse.
    1