Comments by "Vic 2.0" (@Vic2point0) on "Hear the Bern Episode 44 | Big Tents u0026 Iowa" video.

Exactly. Now it's just the billionaires we're supposed to hate.
3
Eh. Trump's doing a great job, IMO, so I'll be voting for him this time.
2
@pathevermore3683 Well he is. And not just with the economy and jobs. But prison reform, support for the pro-life movement, Right to Try, transparency in the costs of medical treatment and getting more drugs approved by the FDA. There's more but you get the idea 😉
2
@pathevermore3683 There's nothing to "buy into", these are just the facts. And I used to not like him either. But I'm not gonna ignore the good things he's done all because you don't think they should count. "Right to Try" alone should matter to you, if you cared about people at all.
2
@pathevermore3683 Well I'm not a Republican (only person I ever voted for was Jill Stein, actually), and by what reasoning do you consider these "bread crumbs"? Again, at least concerning Right to Try, we're talking about people with life-threatening illnesses who can now try drugs that could literally save their lives despite the government red tape.
2
@pathevermore3683 Supporting or agreeing with a Republican doesn't make you one. And what I like about Trump's approach to healthcare is that they're market-based, realistic solutions. Hindering supply while radically increasing demand is how we got in the mess we're in to begin with. Prices skyrocketed in the 60s with the advent of Medicare and Medicaid because the government was greatly hindering supply. Trump's idea is to reverse that (e.g., transparency in the costs of medical treatment and getting more drugs approved by the FDA). But yes we should all be concerned by the fact that when two of Bernie's campaign organizers were exposed promoting violence and/or gulags for anyone who dares to disagree with Bernie, he failed (and continues to fail) to denounce them.
2
@pathevermore3683 That, of course, isn't what I said. You tried to attack me personally by calling me a Republican, so I corrected you (and learn to spell "sense"). So far, government doesn't have a very good record of making anything cheaper, especially if you also want it to be good quality. Again, Trump's policies take history and economics into account, so they're a more realistic approach. We need to do more in opening the market up. There's no reason at all why I shouldn't be able to open a hospital/clinic which can provide (there's that pesky supply side of the real world again) healthcare as well as competition for other hospitals/clinics in that area. But it's better to have a president who's at least pointed in the right direction. If you watch the actual Veritas videos, they show proof that they are indeed real campaign organizers for Bernie. Also, if your theory were correct, it would be all too easy for Bernie himself to say that. Instead, he pretends the whole issue isn't there.
2
@pathevermore3683 That, of course, isn't what I said. You tried to attack me personally by calling me a Republican, so I corrected you (and learn to spell "sense"). So far, government doesn't have a very good record of making anything cheaper, especially if you also want it to be good quality. Again, Trump's policies take history and economics into account, so they're a more realistic approach. We need to do more in opening the market up. There's no reason at all why I shouldn't be able to open a hospital/clinic which can provide (there's that pesky supply side of the real world again) healthcare as well as competition for other hospitals/clinics in that area. But it's better to have a president who's at least pointed in the right direction. If you watch the actual Veritas videos, they show proof that they are indeed real campaign organizers for Bernie. Also, if your theory were correct, it would be all too easy for Bernie himself to say that. Instead, he pretends the whole issue isn't there.
2
@pathevermore3683 "but cell phones and healthcare are vastly different thing. " Are you actually trying to imply that the free market wouldn't drive costs down in the healthcare industry? Because again, we already know exactly when they began to skyrocket. It's no coincidence that the healthcare industry is both the most insanely expensive and the most heavily regulated. That is the difference! (BTW, if this is any kind of "propaganda" it would be Libertarian not Republican; at least get your dismissive labels right.) And it's not like I'm saying "Watch the video and they'll tell you that these people are real campaign organizers for Bernie". I'm saying that the video shows proof of it. If you had watched the videos, you'd know that. And again, if your theory were correct, Bernie would've simply denied that they were really campaign organizers for him in the first place. It would be easy to do that, if your claims had any merit.
2
@pathevermore3683 "i'm saying it has not thus far." What, you think our healthcare system was been a free market this entire time? No wonder you're confused about what works and what doesn't. Well, read what I said again (about how the government has specifically hindered supply in the healthcare industry) and maybe it'll stick this time. I think I might've even given the example of the government not letting us build more hospitals/clinics because they don't see the "need". "i'm saying that a video made by project veritas is fake," Which is a non sequitur. Even if they made misleading or dishonest videos in the past (which I'm not convinced they have, just by your claiming it), it doesn't follow that we should ignore the raw footage in this series of videos. And yes, I'm still waiting for you to address my point that even Bernie isn't claiming that these guys aren't his campaign organizers. This is significant, because if that were the case, it'd be extremely easy for him to do that.
2
@pathevermore3683 No one is saying let them do anything they want. But when you allow for competition in the marketplace, you give those businesses the incentive to improve. This is why virtually everything has gotten cheaper in the past few decades, except for healthcare and higher education (another industry the government has seen fit to "help" us with). Now, I don't think the government officials and politicians are "the devil", no. I think they're ordinary people who are looking out for their own self-interests just like anybody else. And just like any company with guaranteed money from the government, the government itself has no incentive to make things cheaper or better quality (or provide them faster) so they just naturally don't. They're getting our money no matter how poorly they perform. With the free market, however, it's a very different story. They have to do what we want or they go under. And again, if you're looking to dismiss my arguments by just calling me a name, you might as well aim correctly. These are libertarian arguments, and Republicans don't always agree with them either. Just because the Republicans are (currently) more knowledgeable on this stuff than the Democrats doesn't mean they're consistent in applying that knowledge. Yes, it's highly illogical of you to reject what's proven because the people who provided the proof (according to you) have been wrong in the past. If you want me to believe what you're claiming though, feel free to post a link or something. And no, you haven't addressed the point that if these people weren't Bernie's campaign organizers, he would've at least claimed they weren't. I even double-checked to be sure.
2
@pathevermore3683 So now you're denying that almost everything has gotten cheaper over the past few decades. Wow. You realize you're carrying a computer in your pocket everywhere you go, right? And I'm still waiting for you to provide this "proof" that Veritas lied in the past, much less that we should ignore their proof on this particular story on that basis.
2
@pathevermore3683 Sure, but cell phones are just one example of many. Pretty much every sort of product has had downward pressure on its price all along, and as a result even poor people (America's idea of "poor" anyway) have these marvelous devices scattered around them. Healthcare and higher education are just about (and I say that because there might be something else that government has made more expensive that I'm forgetting) the only things which have gotten dramatically more expensive. And in the case of the healthcare, we have the data to show when it got more expensive, and that's when the government got way more involved. Lastly, it's not my job to prove your claims for you.
1
@pathevermore3683 You seem to have lost the thread of the argument. I merely pointed out that, yes, cell phones are a great example of things that have gotten cheaper over the past few decades (thanks to capitalism, like it or not). So much cheaper, in fact, that now everyone has one, even the poor. Now, you ask about food and housing. Well, these turn out to be somewhat more regulated by the government than products like cellphones. There are tons of regulations on each of these. And some of these might be justifiable! But then you have policies like rent control where the government tells the supply side of the housing market how much they can charge. Sounds like a good idea at first. But if that amount isn't tenable for them (e.g., if they do the math and realize they'll actually be losing money if they lease/sell their buildings out for that price), they move to a different place or a different market altogether, resulting in fewer buildings available. But again, I'm not saying the government officials and politicians are "bad". I'm saying that people in general are going to look out for their own self-interests. They're not going to work much harder (if any) to be efficient or effective if they get paid the same either way. When you remove competition, you remove the incentive to worry about such things.
1
@pathevermore3683 We weren't talking about living expenses, lol, we were talking about things that have gotten cheaper and what they have in common. So far, we've gotten relatively free-market goods like cell phones which have gotten a lot cheaper, pretty heavily regulated goods like housing and food which have gotten harder to come by, and healthcare and higher education which are very heavily regulated and so they've gotten insanely expensive. And could you please quit lying? I clarified twice now that I'm not calling the government itself bad. And I explained exactly why it tends to fail at making things cheaper and/or greater quality, and providing them faster. It's just human nature to look out for your own self-interests. Doesn't mean you don't care at all about other people, but you're definitely going to put yourself first. Now, where there's a lack of free market competition this is a bad thing. But in a free market, it's good. It means that even the most "greedy" person has to provide value to become wealthy.
1
@pathevermore3683 Okay, so I don't think that everything is cheaper (In fact, I pointed out some things that aren't and explained why), nor do I think there are no poor people. I also wouldn't just dismiss Bernie as a "dirty commie" (the way you wanted to dismiss me as a "Republican") because I think having these conversations is important. In addition, I'm not saying what the poor do/do not deserve. Some probably deserve to be doing better than they are, and some rich people probably deserve to be doing worse. My aim isn't to attack people on that personal level; I just want to give my case for why I think opening up the market is the best way of helping them. Naturally, I'm not in favor of letting Apple take control of the market either. The idea is that we (the people) should be in control, by way of deciding who does/doesn't deserve our money. That's what capitalism is, at its core. And I don't think Johnson and Johnson should be able to kill people to make cheaper drugs, lol. Killing someone is very much an anti-libertarian thing to do! I didn't say or suggest that the self is the only thing that matters, either. But it is what people prioritize. And so we should have a market that requires people to actually provide value in order to be successful, so that those who are looking to make a better life for themselves will have to make other people's lives better first (whether they personally care a great deal about others or not). So when you characterize libertarian values as "all for me and @#$% everyone else", that's actually the opposite of what we advocate. We don't think anyone should have it "all" unless they're providing value to others. "who needs a governemet for the people, by the people when we can have a governement for the shareholders, by the shareholders." This is definitely touching on a legitimate concern (whether intentionally or otherwise). Right now, there's a big problem with money in politics. Lobbying, bribery, or otherwise making deals with politicians or government officials to "buy favors". For example, a company that wants to prevent others from rising up and giving them a little competition, might lobby the government to put regulations or high fees/taxes on a certain part of their industry. The companies that are already wealthy can afford the change, while the rest are unable to, so they can't join the market. Unfortunately, making all this illegal wouldn't stop it; people are always gonna find a way to buy favors and hide it. The only realistic way to stop this problem, is to remove the power the government has over the market to begin with. If the government can't twist the market in favor of one company or another, then those companies are not going to be giving them their money as there wouldn't be any point. I don't think Veritas is right about all things (although I still haven't seen your proof that they were wrong in the past). But I do think that when they post the actual proof, we should acknowledge it. I also don't think that all of Bernie's supporters are hateful like these two campaign organizers. But they don't seem very bothered by it, and they don't seem to care that Bernie won't denounce them. Sometimes, just remaining quiet about hatred is all the hateful want from you.
1
@pathevermore3683 Ok? So maybe I'll change it to "Now it's just the billionaires America is supposed to hate". Does that make Bernie look any better?
1
Seriously? Try signing out just to see what YouTube recommends to the general public. They are very much biased in favor of Bernie 🙄 Besides, Bernie's also got Hollywood in his pocket, you've nothing to bitch about.
1