Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Timcast" channel.

  1. 450
  2. 111
  3. 99
  4. 41
  5. 34
  6. 25
  7. 23
  8. 19
  9. 14
  10. 12
  11. 11
  12. 10
  13. 10
  14. 9
  15. 8
  16. 8
  17. 8
  18. 8
  19. 8
  20. 7
  21. 7
  22. 7
  23. 7
  24. 6
  25. 6
  26. 5
  27. 5
  28. 5
  29. 4
  30. 4
  31. 4
  32. 4
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. Don't wreck what works for the vast majority of people, to prop up a small segment. If you're liberal and you want to make a change, don't look to government force to solve it. YOU help somebody. As a conservative, that's what I do. And I figure if everybody who likes to virtue-signal and take my money for their compassion got off their ass and helped just one person, we'd solve the homeless problem - for example - one person at a time, without any force. I took in a vision-impaired person, who just needed a safe, quiet place to take classes on Internet skills, as a vision-impairment assistant to website developers (a growth industry). This isn't a hard case, but it did help a guy who fell through the cracks. Just one. And that's how it works. If you haven't taken anybody in, yourself, then shut your mouth about "living wage." It's going straight from idealism to unintended destruction, which is the calling card of the left. In the cities where the homeless problem is out of control, I see a ton of virtue-signalers and a bunch of mansions occupied by virtue signalers with NO homeless being taken in. No INDIVIDUAL help. Liberals don't understand human nature and how the world works. How compassion works. They think that career unelected bureaucrats know better than people how to help people. But you make a career out of administering programs that take money from one person to give to another. Bureaucrats don't care if they're efficient, nor do they really care about the people they're helping. They end up screwing both taxpayer and beneficiary. all unintended. But after many years of watching how things actually work, I'm more and more convinced that leftists are either stupid, willfully ignorant or liars.
    1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. Health insurance executives are trapped. The government tells them what they have to cover, and it can change overnight. So they cozy up to the government to stay in business. Nobody remembers, because it happened so long ago, but health insurance was invented by big corporations as an incentive for prospective employees after Franklin Delano Roosevelt instituted wage freezes during the Great Depression (which FDR capitalized on, to consolidate and perpetuate his power). Big corporations offered health and pension benefits. Before this watershed moment in American history, local charities and benefactors gave to hospitals and built hospitals. The government only makes it SEEM like they're doing a better job than people with actual compassion and charitable instincts. Health care should be a personal and local-community thing, not a slush fund for bureaucrats. Once the government stepped in, the system because essentially socialist/fascist, with a veneer of private enterprise, but CORRUPT private enterprise, because health care providers had to get in good with the government to stay in business. Inevitably, this led to heavy lobbying of Congress to pass laws that protected insurers and health care providers. The end result? Overpriced, low-quality care. This is just how government works, or rather, doesn't work. When you make charity compulsory, you destroy the charitable instinct, and nobody feels any responsibility for their neighbor, because they already pay taxes for that sort of thing, and if anybody's falling through the cracks, that's someone else's fault.
    1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105.  @killcat1971  : Neo-Luddism r'ars its ugly head in yet ANOTHER generation! Automation doesn't eliminate good jobs. It opens up NEW jobs. Every time automation saves a little bit of money for someone, the whole society gets a little richer. More people can afford to hire an artist for that basement mural they always wanted. I think that as the complexities of this world mount, there will be niches opening up for full-time jobs where all you do is handle the grocery shopping and organize the bills. Someone who knows how to play the credit-card game can save a household thousands of dollars, by shifting debt to the new credit card, using it's 1st-year-no-interest for one year, and open up another card in a year or two. There're all kinds of services like that. And who knows what's to come? Maybe they come up with anti-grav back packs and everybody wants a nice landing pad built out in their back yard. Landing-pad builders would then be a thing, employing the same people who used to do wood-frame house construction, before IT went kaput! Thing is, the steady march of progress continues despite all our efforts to mess things up and meddle in 10-variable questions with 1-variable understanding. We don't need to artificially ACCELERATE automation by artificially propping up minimum wage. Minimum wage - like ALL libtard feel-good policies - is an ATTACK on people trying to work their way out of poverty. Libtards always hurt the ones they love, buying their devotion with crumbs. For votes. Libtards see one person in trouble and it's nothing to them to punish all those who are on the ragged edge of being in trouble in order to help that one person who randomly came to their attention and became their focus and sole purpose in life, entitling them to the hard-earned money in your pocket. Your business is BARELY profitable? Well, here are a bunch of extra costs some libtard decided you would have to pay, so the libtard could point to the person he helped. Too bad if your business goes under. We helped the guy we set out to help, and DAMN THE TORPEDOS! FULL SPEED AHEAD! Because we're righter than rightie. The guy who's BARELY paying her (SWIDT?) bills gets destroyed by a 20% increase in energy prices. Everything costs more, especially heating and cooling her home. That "green legislation" that everybody cheered just pushed another 20 million, barely-gettin'-by working poor below the poverty line. Didn't think about THAT added cost. And from the progressive's point of view, if they never hear about or see that person they hurt, then life goes on and they can still feel proud of themselves, because they can go straight to the government for proof that they're doing something for the people they say they care about. The consequences of progressivism are diffuse and the benefits obvious. You can put that guy's face on t.v. that you helped. But nobody's talking about the accumulating weight of small hardships visited on everyone by helping just the one with everybody's money. Most of the time, the average citizen just tightens their belt and soldiers on. Especially the BEST people who are just on hard times. Those are the people that libtards despise and seek to destroy at every opportunity, usually in the name of helping them, but it can also be to "save the planet" or "kill evil Iraqis," and "it's a cost we will gladly pay!" when they've got all THEIR bills on auto-pay and their checking account just grows every month until they have enough to buy another expensive toy. They'll sacrifice the delivery date on their Ferrari, but they don't think about the guy who's postponing new shoes for her kid, who's outgrown the pair he's wearing, now.
    1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. We're undergoing a paradigm shift away from globalism. Nationalism is the short-term beneficiary, but LOCALism is the ultimate beneficiary. People are figuring out (again) that the "anointed nobility" aren't in touch with everyday life, let alone competent to direct all its activities Remote learning got a huge boost. Smart institutions will foster that shift. Moribund institutions will resist that shift. Brick-and-mortar ain't goin' away, but it's clearly declining. I've been saying for years that it's really dumb to make your kid go to school and sit in a classroom with everybody their chronological age, getting a one-size-fits-all lesson, live, from a teacher who's aiming at the stupidest kid in the room, to get that kid a 'C' while the gifted kids are held back by the slowest student. There's a lot of resistance to the shift in education, because the institutions AND the students 'brought up' in that institutional framework think that the way they've always done it is the best way. And teachers' egos drive a lot of it. They're SURE their students can't learn without their WONDERFUL teacher watering everything down and holding their hand on everything. But in my opinion, institutional definition of "Student Success" is to ensure that more students pass, whether they actually have mastered the content or not. They'll never admit that, but it's exactly what they're pushing for, and it just leads to need for MORE hand-holding, and - of course - more MONEY, because "We need to remediate these learning deficits, and allow for 'differences in race, ethnicity, gender, and economic background.'" Bullshit. We need to put students in the classes they NEED, and require mastery before promoting them to the NEXT class they need. USA's public-education 'learning products' are inferior. Run by accountants with spreadsheets and SJWs with oppression hierarchies tattooed on their foreheads, instead of the teachers and students. You want boys to start excelling in STEM, like they used to? Give them an online learning management system (LMS, like Pearson MyLab and Mastering or Cengage WebAssign), and cut off their video games until they get their homework done! The cool thing is that it would motivate those boys to get it done, AND it would present the knowledge they NEED, exactly when they need it, i.e., instant, on-demand help. Instead, they're trying to perfect an outmoded content-delivery system, devised for a time where there might be only ONE person in the WHOLE TOWN who actually owns a book! Now, EVERYbody has the INTERNET!
    1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1