Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "John Stossel" channel.

@idrathernot_2 It sure is. In Oregon, they're forcibly shutting down small vegetable farmers to protect the environment. It might be that their socialist government is in bed with big corporate farmers. Just like during the Covid crisis. Small businesses were shut down. Mega corporations made a fortune. The state of Michigan wouldn't allow the sale of seeds so people wouldn't go outside and plant vegetable gardens. Big ag wins again. In Canada, they have marketing boards that won't allow small farmers to sell their products to the public. Dairy farmers have to pay a fortune to buy a milk quota in order to produce. Go over that quota and you're penalised so farmers pour the extra milk into the ground. The result. No small dairy farmers. I could go on and on. It seems that every socialist measure helps the corporate farms and diminishes the small farmer.
1
I've tried to explain to people, who hold up Sweden as the perfect socialist state, that they have a capitalist economic system. They don't believe it. Part of the problem is that they don't realise capitalism involves the production of capital goods and that Sweden says that all those involved in production to be part of the free market system. This strong capitalist system allows for the profits and jobs to tax the people so they can have strong social programs. It's the decision on what constitutes social programs and what is part of the market economy, something that is always in flux. Socialist don't get that. They believe that socialism rules over every facet of a countries operations. That's true if you equate it with Marxism but not when you consider a capitalist economy. As long as business is forced to be a part of due process and follows the rule of law, it is the best system that we've, as humans, have come up with.
1
@MrDlt123 So true.
1
To be honest, the little girl was kidnapped. They were dressed in blue and escaped in a squad car and then hid her away for a couple of weeks. A clear cut case of kidnapping.
1
The Interesting Nobody Science is NOT a religion. It's a methodology, a way of carrying out an educational process that uses hypothesis, experimentation, observation and conclusions drawn from the observations. Nothing at all religious about it. You follow a template of learning. That's all it is. You may draw wrong conclusions from your observations and it happens all the time. To prove that a conclusion A is wrong, you make a prediction from that conclusion A that if the conclusion from an experiment were true, your prediction should also be true which in turn validates conclusion A. You devise an experiment that proves your prediction and then observe what the results of your experiments were. If it confirms your prediction, the original conclusion A is still true. If it prediction isn't proved correct, you've just showed evidence that the original conclusion A is also false. How that is a religion is beyond me. It's doing something to see if it works....that's all.
1
I always go looking for the evidence that they might have. it's amazing what you find out if you do that. One thing to remember is that the media will tell the truth if it benefits the narrative. That means that it can be true and it's how they try to prove their integrity. "See, that's true so therefore this MUST be true, too". They'll use the truth to lie to you. It's what liars do.
1
@AquarianSoulTimeTraveler You sound like one angry human being. I can't begin to take you seriously until you calm down a bit and speak like a rational adult.
1
@augustuscaesar8287 So then....our ancestors came out of Africa. You just said so. They believe that the first modern human came out of Africa but would be quite open to new evidence that would show differently. It makes no difference to anyone where the first anatomically modern human came from. The price of tea won't change, people will still have to go to work tomorrow, pay taxes, pat the dog or buy groceries. No political party will benefit. Nothing will change. It has to be one of the silliest conspiracy theories around.
1
@rockbandjohn Bigger yields, that means MORE FOOD.......and that's a bad thing??? You sure don't want Farmer Joe reaping 200 bushels instead of 100 bushels of wheat, do we. Farmer Joes don't need that money.....the elitist greedy money grubbing scumbags. We don't need the extra food. If you're hungry....GET A JOB or go to the food bank.
1
@jacobawojtowicz Actually, this was demanded by ALL politicians, not just Trump and it was done around the world. In fact, Democrats said that Trump didn't do enough to halt Covid and were angry that he left it to individual states to set their own policies. That meant that Republican states, like Florida and South Dakota, had very few restrictions and were held up as examples of what NOT to do by Democrats. Andrew Cuomo was lauded by Democrats for his very strict policies in New York. So, pretending that the Democrats would have done any different is a fallacy. Democrats would have done the same, restricting work, and they might have even been worse. It's a nice try but no.....the shutting of the economy was inevitable and most would have been screaming blue murder had Trump advocated for NO restrictions when Covid began.
1
@BEAUTYnIQ The traditional honey bee isn't even native to the Americas. They're an invasive species. How did the indigenous people of the Americas even develop the corn, potatoes and beans that we all eat today without honey bees? It's a damn miracle.....or the whole bee apocalypse narrative is just that. A story to scare the hell out of us.
1
@ShawnPatton-rm2hv We all know about racism in the US. I learned about slavery WAY back in the sixties, in school. You can't talk about the Civil War and not talk about slavery. We've all been taught about it but now it's been distorted. It's portrayed as a unique American and European phenomenon which is absolute nonsense. It's used by radical socialist to divide us instead of bring us together. “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” – Martin Luther King, Jr. This is NOT what being taught in schools these days. In fact, it's SO bad that California wanted to eliminate their state Civil Rights Act in the 2020 elections....the very act that Dr. King fought so hard for in the sixties. There are schools with Black's only dormitories, graduations and events. I've even heard people criticising mixed marriages by radical left wing activists. They're calling the people in mixed marriages "race traitors" something that the KKK used to say all the time. Larry Elder, a black American, was called the "black face of white supremacy" by his political opponents on the left. This is where the type of teaching has led us. Race relations are WORSE now then they were in the eighties and nineties and it's ALL because of this obsession with race. I know that you're a troll and I'm wasting my time but if you want division, keep teaching about race the way that they are now. It will tear this country apart and that's EXACTLY what the radical left wants. Revolution by any means necessary.
1
You gotta wonder, at the integrity of a mayor, who needs his lawyer at his side at city council meetings.
1
Apparently, Obama hasn't met too many Americans....other than those in his elitist circles.
1
madwtube It's a law because of drugs, like Thalidomide, that have caused problems in the the past. That set off a slew of legislation designed to not EVER have that happen again, if possible, and that's just fine, to a certain extent. Also, a drug, that's not approved by the FDA, cannot be used or prescribed by a doctor. If a doctor does do it, that's where the litigation starts. The "right to try" is legislation designed to prohibit lawsuits when a drug, that is in testing phase, is applied in desperate situations. That's all it is. It's not a scam....I'm not even sure what the hell that means. It allows drugs, already in the testing phase, to be used as a last hope, without fear of litigation or indictment.
1
madwtube Of course it does. It's like saying that murder doesn't happen because there's a law against it. Foolishly naive, however it doesn't mean that we abandon the laws against murder, either. The FDA sets standards in the hopes that it doesn't happen again. It's a mitigation process, put in place to limit occurrences. It's NOT a guarantee that it won't EVER happen again. You seem to skirt around the problem, a severe problem, of how to handle certain terminal cases. If you're facing certain death and there is a hope, why not try it? You've not given ONE good reason why desperate situation should NEVER justify desperate measures. Would you be that resigned to death that you'd never even try? I find that astounding......and baffling. Worse, what gives you, or ANYONE, the right to make that decision for someone else?
1
madwtube A great way to avoid the question. Just call me names. I'm going to assume that if you're in the hospital and the doctors have told you that there's nothing more they can do, except for an experimental procedure or drug, which looks promising, you'll call it a scam and refuse to do it. That's some great decision making skills that you have there. I guess "pull the plug" is the only acceptable answer for you. I have a feeling that this has nothing to do with terminal illness at all. I could be wrong but you're basing this entire argument on a fervent hatred for Donald Trump and because it's his idea, you're knee jerk response is to oppose it. Tell me that I'm wrong and that you like the president. I'll bet that you won't.
1
madwtube I never said that the FDA hasn't approved drugs that was later found to be dangerous. I never said that at all. I said this......copied and pasted from an earlier comment. "The FDA sets standards in the hopes that it doesn't happen again. It's a mitigation process, put in place to limit occurrences. It's NOT a guarantee that it won't EVER happen again." I repeat....."It's NOT a guarantee that it won't EVER happen again." DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT MEANS? It means that it could and most likely will happen again. Once again, you're ignoring my questions. FIRST....if you were told that there's nothing to be done and you were going to die would you allow an experimental procedure to be used in the hope that it might work? It requires a simple yes/no answer. Example....yes, I'm dying and I'll give it a shot....OR No, I'd rather die than try an experimental drug that might save my life. (???) SECOND.....Do you like Donald Trump. Again....yes/no. Give it a shot. Answer those 2 questions.
1
@ivonned32 Division is good for the politicians who think that way. The ones who want to seize power by using the angry to destroy the things that we cherish. The angry come from every race, gender, sexual preference and religion. You see it in the BLM riots. Just as many whites burning and looting as blacks. That whites are setting fires, for all kinds of reasons, doesn't take away from the fact that the authorities allow the underbrush to grow, wildly, until a dry summer turns it into a tinderbox. The indigenous people, before Europeans came to the Americas, would burn it off, quite frequently, so the fires were manageable. Now they let everything grow, without management, until, more accurately WHEN, a fire does start, it's a raging fire from hell. Because a fire will start, one way or another.
1
Honey bees aren't native to the Americas but there are other pollinators that are. That's why you will still clover patches. The one thing that happens is that as soon as people see a will colony of honey bees, they call a beekeeper and the colony is taken away. In fact, the public is encouraged to do this. I'm not saying that this is the ONLY reason you don't see as many but it has to contribute to why you don't see as many.
1
@onewildandcrazyguy9213 A healthy economy is one of wealth exchange. I have something and I will exchange it for something that I would like. That is how an economy should operate. What socialists want to do is take what I have and give me nothing in return. It's forced on me and I have no say in the matter. It's theft made legal. Why would I put any effort to create anything if the fruit of my labour is taken from me? It's the basic reason why socialism is a failed concept. It rewards those who take and punishes those who create.
1
@onewildandcrazyguy9213 This is the definition of the word "socialism" "a political and economic theory of social organisation which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole." Socialism pertains to the means of production or the acquisition of wealth and how a society engages in that goal. It says the state should be in control of production and decide what the market wants. Capitalism says that production should be in the control of the producers and decided on what the market wants. In other words the freedom of the individual to decide what he wants and the supplier decides on whether he will supply it or not. A fire department or a public water system is not socialism. It's an expense of living, the exact opposite of production. As a society, we've made a tacit agreement to share in the cost of life's expenses and we call them social programs. Therefore we build roads, schools, police departments, a military and the infrastructure that a community needs and we all chip in to build and maintain it. Without a strong economy, there is no wealth attained by the private citizens and we can't chip in to aid in the cost of expenses. We call that money we chip in "taxes". If no one is producing, there is no money being made and no taxes paid. This is the reason socialism is doomed to failure. In Venezuela, as an example, the nationalised oil industry financed the social programs. Those seeking office would promise the electorate the world because the oil revenue was the cash cow that would financially fulfil all their promises. The oil industry had no money left over for maintenance, research and development, hiring the top people and training. Eventually it had to collapse. It's why the Soviet Union failed and why China changed it's strategy allowing for free enterprise while remaining in control of the larger sectors of business.
1
@onewildandcrazyguy9213 Did you not even bother to read the official dictionary definition of socialism I provided? If you did, read it again because it's quite evident that you didn't understand it. Socialism covers the means of production or the gross national product. Basically what all the produce and investments in a country that gives the country monetary value. It's how rich a nation is. Social security is an expense. It doesn't make the country any richer. It's a social program that costs the nation money but allows for a cohesive and civilised society. So....NO. Social security is not socialism. It's an expense of running a country and does NOT involve the means of production in any way. Production, in the economic sense, means to produce something of value. You do not produce or manufacture social security. When it is the state or government that controls all or most of production, oil, paper, cars, pencils, toilet paper, potatoes, ladders.....manufactured goods, that's a socialist system. That's what that definition says. It says nothing about social security, education, highways, the police or all those other government run agencies because the produce nothing. They are an expense of the state and do not incur wealth or value.
1
@onewildandcrazyguy9213 Social security can be said to be socialised but it's not a part of the economy. READ the official definition of socialism, AGAIN. It talks about the economy not state social programs. The military isn't socialism because it is not a part of the means of production. Neither is social security. NOTHING is being produced. Macdonald's is a part of the economy. It's the sales aspect of production or how a product is exchanged after it is produced. Now you're presenting a youtube video, an opinion piece, as evidence over an official definition of the word that has been recognised for years "Nothing strikes more fear" is how she starts. That's an opinion piece. If you can't tell the difference, it's no wonder you can't tell the difference between a socialist country and a capitalist country. One has it's economy controlled by the state and the other through the freedom of the market and enterprise. What you're describing are social programs. They provide no wealth to a nation's fiscal well being. They are necessary expenses of a successful nation.
1
@onewildandcrazyguy9213 Apparently, official definitions mean nothing to you but I'll try another source. This is from Merriam/Webster dictionary----- "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" Or how about encyclopedia Britannica---- ", social and economic doctrine that calls for public rather than private ownership or control of property and natural resources" Now, I've given you 3 official definitions of socialism. If you still don't understand how socialism has to do with the means of production, I don't know what else to tell you. I can't understand why you won't address these definitions. It's like you're pretending that I haven't even posted them.
1
@Josh-b3c That's correct. The only one to complain to are the ones that are doing the damage. It's an impossibility. Your small company can't sue that big company for polluting your water because you don't OWN your company and neither do they. It's the government that owns everything and they'll tell you that they've decided that it's for the greater good. Socialism takes away your voice.
1
He's not stupid. He's caught up in a radical socialist ideology and like every ideologue, critical thinking goes out the window.
1
@makeamericasmartagain3974 Explain to me, then, why China has some of the worst pollution problems in the world. It's run by the Chinese Communist Party, strongly socialist to its core. No one can complain about the issue. The Party allows it and the Party is the only one who can change it and they won't. It's why American corporations have gone to China. A lot of money to be made when you don't have to deal with laws and the ire of the average citizen who can start a class action suit against you. Try that in a socialist country.
1
@vladtepes481 LOL. Hitler is another example of how socialism will go wrong. No matter the propaganda of the left, Fascists are socialists.
1
@ThrifterGuy I'll bet Carlin believed it. He came from nowhere and had a net worth of 10 million dollars when he died. It's just a funny line and he was looking for laughs. A "little Johnny" joke doesn't need to be true to be funny.
1
Bumblebees are pollinators. Some species even depend on them for pollination. Also, bumblebees are native to the Americas while honey bees are not. Wasps also pollinate and some hornets. So do butterflies.
1
Tucson Jim "I didn't die from the gash from the chainsaw on my leg. I died of blood poisoning from the wound" Essentially true but you can't discount the importance of the chainsaw accident. No accident, no blood poisoning and no death. Same as the Covid virus. No virus, no complications and no death. They go hand in hand. Also, Gelsolin is not a cure or a drug. It is something that they could use to help boost an immune system when a boost would be quite useful. It won't hurt you and it may give you the extra strength to stay alive. Sort of like the research that says chicken soup helps to boost the immune system. Chicken soup isn't a cure but it helps. Gelsolin may not be the cure but it can be part of a regime to recovery since it's already a required protein in your body. What is wrong with looking into it? I don't get the problem. Also, I'm defending or condemning the FDA. I'm acknowledging that they exist and why it exists. I'm not saying it's perfect. In fact, I've said that, quite strongly, that it wasn't. The FDA mandate is there for all to see and I've paraphrased that mandate or purpose. Now, we can quibble all day about what's right or wrong about it but the fact that it is there and has a purpose is undeniable. Unless you really want Drug companies to release new drugs, without controls or guidelines, whenever they want without a care for any deadly consequences. I'm not really sure what the problem is here.
1
"LIFE IS HARD" Did you hear that, Democrats? Life is hard. The minute a person realises that, that's the minute he's starting to understand that he has to work hard to make life easier. Money doesn't do that. Funding doesn't. Even good attendance won't. Hard work is the answer.
1
They really don't want green energy, either. They want a return to a state of naturalism, to become the noble savage, living off the land but not touching it. It's a heaven that's been created and exists between their ears.
1
@palaceofwisdom9448 Every union shop that I worked in, screwed me and I was a union employee. Unions are a haven for the lazy and incompetent.
1
Has anyone told Morning Joe that Trump supports school choice and school vouchers? That should change his attitude about this right quick.
1