Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Stossel: Rand Paul on The Case Against Socialism" video.

"It might be hard to swallow, but face it: there are some things that private sector is terrible at doing: healthcare, roads, parks and beaches, water, finance" - but the state pays private corporations to build the roads, many countries sell the concession of beaches to private enterprises to the point that while beaches are legally considered public they're managed for profit, etc. "law enforcement" - you look among the US public law enforcement and tell me the government does a good job
3
@badwolf259 lmao so gunning down innocent people, chokeholding people to death and raping sex workers is your concept of doing a better job. In the private sector you rescind the contract with these people and they go bankrupt. In the public sector you pay for their pension.
3
@badwolf259 lmao the government decided to let a private investment firm build a luxury resort and habitation near the beach even though all environmental impact studies were against it. The local government won't dispute it because they want the jobs. You get the same end result.
3
left libertarians still want to put a bullet in my brain
3
@smileyp4535 that's not true. Right libertarianism is the natural state and thus requires no authority to enforce, while left libertarianism does require it. It's not about meritocracy or where you start from, it's about the level of force required to maintain the system.
3
Why is it best? It doesn't work in Southern Europe.
3
@Friedrich That's hogwash. The federal government is just as abusive if not more. Remember Waco or Ruby Ridge? Feds are okay with murdering children.
2
@Aceshooting I never said that. You're strawmanning. So apparently one can't sanity check others' ideologies and question narratives, because that's nitpicky. Get called out? Call others nitpickers to make yourself immune from criticism.
2
@JohnDoe48959 Plenty of people went to college and they're still dumb as rocks. Meanwhile there's a ton of smart people who never went to college. If you want a society that isn't dumb as rocks you're not asking for free college, you're asking for eugenics. Fundamental to democracy. Okay. Democracy hasn't done shit for the people except allow them to vote tyrants into office. Worldwide, even if places with all the government funded benefits, people are democratically electing politicians who steal more and more and take away freedoms. Why is democracy that important when all we get is a bunch of lying thieves trying to bribe us with our own money? The world is still controlled by oligarchs. "an educated society allows business to have better employees" - sounds to me that if businesses want better employees they better start paying, not get the government to educate people for them and then take advantage of the system. "it also improves are ability to compete in the global job market" - And why is that important? Who are we "competing" against? And why are they "competing" with us? What are they sacrificing in order to get ahead? Let everyone else win the race to the bottom. "there is a shit ton of benefits to making education easier to access to the population" - Education has never been easier to access. You can learn almost anything through the internet and libraries.
2
@JohnDoe48959 you said you wanted people to not be dumb as rocks. That's something you can't learn in school. Free college won't change that.
2
@smileyp4535 if you're not willing to kill capitalists you're a good ole right libertarian like us
2
@smileyp4535 if you don't kill me, capitalism will happen. I will have to be physically stopped or else I'll be doing my own thing and ignore whatever else you got going on.
2
@smileyp4535 "requires force to keep it in operation because how else will you secure your private property rights?" - how do you remove property rights without force? Securing private property is an act of self-defense. I don't need force if you don't steal my shit. Don't steal, and there's no force. "Left libertarianism has no property because everything belongs to everyone and everyone gets what they need" - that's inherently anti-libertarian. If I work for something and you try to claim it belongs to everyone, you're literally stealing my labour aka not only my effort but time of my life I cannot get back. By telling me that my things are not mine you're stealing a portion of my life. "there's no force required" - you need force to make people comply with your system "you may be thinking of authoritarianism which left or right does require force to keep alive" - the problem is that you're describing a voluntary system without any dissent. Voluntary systems are right-libertarian.
2
@Friedrich that's a non-argument. I am writing this comment in my laptop. I am not punching anyone or pointing guns to keep writing. How is the fact that I own my laptop a requirement to use force? I only use force if you come over and try to steal it, which is an act of force to begin with so my act gets canceled out.
2
@Friedrich "You can do this, because others are using force" - not really. Force is being used for nefarious purposes, not in my protection. If someone was about to rob me right now, no amount of force by others would save me. Only my own force. "Your survival instincts don't work right now" - brother, I garan-fucking-tee you that I'm more in tune with survival instincts than any bootlicker who thinks government force is saving their ass. I have accepted the responsibility of taking care of myself. It's pansies who think someone else is taking care of them. "The idea that some NAP would be the natural state of humanity is absurd." - Except that it is. You fuck around, you end up finding out. Rules of nature.
2
@Friedrich "You wouldn't have a chance against a larger group of people." - give me legal immunity and we could test that out. "Why do you Americans think you are Rambo?" - I am not American. "The only reason why you are safe is because of your government having a heavily armed standing army" - lmao the armed forces don't do shit to protect anyone. Are you seriously sitting here, telling me that if there's gangs and criminals outside your house, the army is gonna do anything? Armed forces aren't even supposed to operate within their own nation according to the constitution of a lot of Western countries. "police force of millions" - Bullshit. The police are the biggest criminals and the biggest threat. In fact you can google it right now, when the NYPD has a strike the crimes actually drop. "So stop with this "i am responsible for myself"" - if you wanted to kill me right now, you think the Army would protect me? You think cops, who are 20-40 minutes away, would protect me? No! I'd have to protect myself. "You clearly aren't entirely responsible for yourself. The evidence is overwhelmingly. " - you have no evidence! You literally have not provided any of the overwhelming evidence! You're just declaring yourself to be right because you know you're losing.
2
@Friedrich "There is no way you could win a war against a organized standing army" - did you read the recently released Afghanistan Papers? You should. Did you remember what happened in Vietnam? Didn't they teach that shit in school? Organized standing armies can only fight organized standing armies. Against insurgencies they suck ass. "The police is not preventing every single crime and i never said so." - then you're being intellectually dishonest. You said police protected me. Now you're admitting that they can't. "However the police presence and the threat of the justice system itself prevents many crimes from happening" - You can't prove something that is not happening. And like I said, when the NYPD went on strike crimes actually dropped. "It is the police that prevents large groups of criminals from controlling the streets" - and yet: 1) criminals do control streets anyway 2) you've just replaced one type of criminal for another "What could happen if the state fails can be observed in Mexico" - lmao the irony is that cartels get their power from being able to control the police. When the people in Mexico got fed up they disarmed the cops and started fighting the cartels on their own. "And it is the military that is preventing other countries from invading the US and putting you into camps." - You mean camps like Guantanamo, that the US military runs? Motherfucker you think other countries could invade the US? The US couldn't take over Vietnam. They couldn't take over Afghanistan and are now trying to make peace with the Taliban so that they leave the TAPI pipelines alone. You think China could fight in the Appalachian mountains? You think the Russian army, which is so shitty that young soldiers are forced into prostitution to make money for their officers and where fit men spend half of their conscription service bedridden in hospitals due to pneumonia, is gonna survive the Rocky Mountains?
2
BigErn_Mccraken monopolies are essentially enforced by the government to prevent fair competition.
2
@TheAverageJoe2014 that's false because Canada does have private clinics and they're contracted by the Canadian provincial governments to provide service to the public clients along with private users. But that's beside the point, countries like Germany and France benefit greatly from being manufacturers who sell to everyone else, at the expense of for example Southern European countries which have repeatedly stood at the edge of the fiscal cliff and required bailouts. Let's also not mention how Eastern Europe and the Balkans were very much ransacked by the big guys during the transition away from communism. Don't tell me how well it works in the countries that created artificial advantages for themselves at the expense of others. Show me how it works on the failing countries. Oh wait, it doesn't. Crash the French and Canadian economies for a fair comparison and then see what kind of healthcare system they'd be working with.
2
@Friedrich okay, so the system doesn't work because it requires absolute compliance from the people and you only see that kind of order and discipline in certain countries. Big whoop, leave it be where people comply and stop trying to force it down everyone's throat if you're going to recognize it doesn't work.
2
@Friedrich Medicare is not comparable to any other developed country. Medicare sets prices by law rather than contract and forces the private sector to charge the private customer a good chunk of the cost. Tell me in which other country people with private health insurance are forced to deal with price hikes because the government refuses to pay their bills in full.
2
@Friedrich "Social Democracy would work in the US, because the US has high or even higher levels of compliance" - lmao the US is closer to undeveloped than central Europe, let alone Northern Europe. Look at Flint, Michigan. Look at San Francisco. Look at the rural areas falling to a meth epidemic. They literally have NASCAR, a sport born out of illegal bootleggers and almost nobody turned in their bump-stocks when they were declared illegal. Compliance my ass.
2
@Friedrich "I am living in Germany and i pay less than 100 Dollars per month for my health insurance" - which means you don't have a Medicare system otherwise you'd be paying much higher prices. The private insurer would have to charge you for the money the government doesn't pay like in the American Medicare system.
2
@Friedrich We're not talking about Sander's idea of Medicare. I am talking about the REAL Medicare that exists.
2
@Friedrich 1. We have social democracy and 2. you literally said that it doesn't work because we're less disciplined, how the fuck is something that doesn't work gonna discipline us? "Except for the homelessness crisis"? Are you fucking kidding? San Francisco is closer to Rio De Janeiro or Caracas than Copenhagen or Helsinki. Flint, Michigan was under Democrat control during the whole ordeal. How are low taxes responsible for the fact that the government was corrupt as hell, and they're from the "let's increase taxes" party?
2
Why free college?
1
@Aceshooting if upward mobility was achieved through college why are a worrying percentage of college graduates working jobs that have nothing to do with their degree? If the issue is upward mobility why not tax people less and let them use that money to secure their future? Why devalue a college degree by making it free, and thus pretty much force everyone to go to college even when they don't have the intellectual ability to do it? I've paid for my mistakes and fuck ups. I don't want to think about the money I sunk trying to pursue a degree, nor the loss of potential revenue if I had completed the degree and started working in the field, because that's straight up depressing. But I've paid my dues, and I don't think it's right for me to demand for me to take a free ride through college and fuck it all up like I did.
1
@Aceshooting if there's a shortage of blue collar workers then free college is the last thing you want as it only pushes more people into the "everyone needs to go to college!" fallacy we've been told for years. I don't see how re-training solves anything. Half the people I got into college with did not finish. Inability to finish doesn't keep you out. If anything, you're advocating for stricter grade average barriers to make up for the "free" model.
1