Comments by "Digital Footballer" (@digitalfootballer9032) on "PragerU"
channel.
-
2900
-
2400
-
624
-
285
-
272
-
133
-
Religion is like politics, or even economics. There are lots of different beliefs out there, but no matter how strongly you believe in your way, no one particular way has been proven right. All you can do is think freely however you believe is right, and there will always be people who disagree with you. If we had all the answers, life would be much easier. But we don't. I believe we aren't supposed to. Whether that is God, the nature of the universe, or just simple human shortcomings, is up for you to decide. If we knew all the answers, there would be no point in religion, politics, economics, scientific theory, or debate.
128
-
49
-
46
-
45
-
37
-
32
-
Healthcare isn't an intangible like free speech, freedom of religion, voting rights, etc. As Been Shapiro has stated many times, it's a commodity. Healthcare can never be "free" for anyone unless doctors start working for free. It can be "taken care of" by others, but never free. Who will "take care of it"? The government. Two big problems there. One, the government couldn't run a lemonade stand if they were given free lemons...and two, "the government" doesn't have some giant magic self-funded piggy bank, the taxpayers fund the government. Are there better ways to run the healthcare system? Sure. But single payer government run is not the answer.
I worked in medical finance for years and did the spreadsheets. The Medicare and Medicaid systems are a joke. The hospital just eats the costs that the government doesn't cover. As of 2014, that was every dollar above $248 for a Medicaid patient. The hospital of course makes up for it by charging people's insurance $50 for an Advil, and about $10 grand for a bed for a night. Many more problems than this, but I can only type for so long.
30
-
CEOs do "less work" huh? I'd like to see you take a crack at running a Fortune 500 company for a day. Typical no nothing liberal brat that thinks executives do nothing but sit around and light cigars with $100 bills and get paid for it. Believe me, I've been on both ends. I've never been a CEO, but I have been an accountant and a manager (white collar "easy" jobs), and I have worked retail, food service, and warehouse (blue collar "hard" jobs). The amount of stress, expectations, long hours for no extra pay, and knowledge needed to to the "white collar" jobs vastly exceeds any hard physical labor you have in a "blue collar" job, unless maybe you are a lumberjack or oil rigger, but they get paid well also. Just because you sit at a desk doesn't make your job easy. I wasn't spinning in my chair all day in those jobs, I was doing complex work 60 some odd hours a week, managing idiots, and having my manager breathing down my neck constantly. I'd go back to retail unloading trucks and stocking shelves for the same pay any day. There's a reason those jobs pay differently. You need to grow up and experience the real world, and not go off what some leftist Looney toon professor at community college brainwashed you with.
27
-
26
-
19
-
18
-
16
-
12
-
12
-
I live in NY, where the $15 minimum wage law was passed a few years ago. Where I live upstate it is being phased in, and we are at $13.25/hr now I believe. What I have noticed is happening in the service industry, which is mainly made of people at or around minimum wage, is they give hardly any hours to the employees, and work the salaried managers about 80 hours a week so their hourly equivalent is much lower than minimum wage. You go to any store, whether that be a fast food restaurant, a grocery store, a retail store, or whatever, and there are usually hardly any people working, things are a mess, and the lines are long.
12
-
12
-
11
-
In my former job, I did budgets for a U.S. hospital near the Canadian border. No lie, nearly half our earnings were from Canadian patients paying out of pocket. I did the financial reports. I saw the numbers. There is a reason they come here, and it is exactly for the reasons explained above.
This is why also, that despite being a city on the decline for over 50 years in terms of industry and manufacturing, Buffalo NY has one of the fastest growing medical sectors in the country. They can't build new medical facilities here fast enough. Yes, there are other reasons such as lower labor costs and a large medical school at the University of Buffalo, but a big factor is in all the profits to be made off of Canadian out of pocket payers. You can literally throw a stone from downtown and hit someone in Canada, so you can see why (no, not that Canadians are getting injured by stones we throw at them, but the close proximity!🤣🤣🤣). Yes, Buffalo, where we are so far north that Canada isn't to the north, it is to the west! That is where the money is made in health care. Hospitals lose money off Medicare and Medicaid claims. They do turn a profit off private insurance, but nothing like out of pocket payers. They basically can charge whatever they want because they don't have to fight insurance companies for compensation. The medical sector is exploding here and that is a big reason why.
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Nobody's trying to prove anything. Prager himself is not saying he has "proof of God". He is simply stating that the concept of an afterlife goes along with a good and just God. He is saying one without the other is illogical. Maybe you think both are illogical. That's your right. Maybe others don't, that's their right. Nobody can prove the existence of God, I'm quite certain that if there is a God, it is beyond human capabilities to prove it... that's kind of the point in religion. Whether you are religious or not, the concept behind religion is that life is a test. If you already know the answer (God is proven to exist, or not exist), it kind of defeats the purpose. You either choose to believe, or you choose not to. And if you somehow think it makes you superior to insult others who believe differently than you, whether you are a believer or non-believer, that makes you a small pathetic person. There is no I know I'm right and you're wrong, because nobody knows the answer. As for Pascal's Wager, you can pick it apart all you want, but it's pretty simple and straightforward. He basically says what do you have to lose. Well, what DO you have to lose? Lose face with some internet troll on YouTube? Oh, the shame. My whole life is based on not giving a shit what others think, and religious beliefs are no exception. You do what makes you happy, and I will me, as long as it doesn't bring harm to others. Pretty easy philosophy to live by.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
I have a college degree, but have a job that doesn't require one. I make between $30-40 an hour (depending on bonuses), which is more than I ever made in a job that did require a degree, and, I like the job itself much more. I also got promoted to a manager effective January 1st, so next year going forward that wage will be more on the $40-50 an hour range. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't have bothered with University, but I still would have gone to community college, as I feel that was actually valuable, and it was cheap. I learned much more about real world skills in community college, where as University was much more theoretical nonsense you will probably never use.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Also it should be taken into consideration that these were all European definitions of left and right...which are quite different than Americans define it. In Europe the right was always the aristocracy, the nobility, and the loyalists to them, and the left were those like the revolutionary French, revolutionary Russia, Weimar, etc. It was stodgy old traditionalists and reactionaries vs. libertines and borderline anarchy. A much broader difference than as defined here. All the different definitions by region and over time have basically made a mess out of defining any of these things. In many places outside the United States, a national party is right, a liberal is center right, and a labour and or social democrat party is left. Most places outside the U.S. liberal doesn't mean left, it's more the classic definition like a modern libertarian. As a libertarian myself I also, like Dennis, say there is a big difference between a liberal and a leftist.
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Yes, the Korean conflict and Vietnam war were basically proxy wars against Red China and the USSR. Many people do not realize that. Another little known fact was that Finland was allied with the Germans in WWII, mainly due to a deep hatred for the Soviets, held over from the Russo-Finnish war, and land disputes with the Soviets. The Finns, however, did eventually switch sides and fight on the Allied side. Sweden and Spain, though officially neutral, were both nominally Axis, as well as much of the Middle East, with the exception of Iran, who was believe it or not an American ally until the 1960's. And don't forget our good friends in Bulgaria, the only minor power to fight on the losing side both times.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
In many cases, it ends up being the maximum by default. Elimination of the minimum wage would make hiring more competitive. The places that paid more could be more selective in who they hire, especially if they offered incentives for pay raises, and their business would flourish and create more jobs. Places that wanted to offer low wages and no incentives would eventually fail. This would cause competitive wage offerings by businesses. Right now because of the minimum wage, everyone offers the bare minimum, so everyone else does it, and everyone who works for them offers the bare minimum work because there is no incentive to not just "work just hard enough not to get fired". It also curbs transientism in jobs...which reduces training costs among other things. Back when I was young and in school, the minimum wage was $5.15/hr. Pretty much all the fast food joints paid that, and many retail stores. I took a job at a retail store that paid $5.75 to start, $6.00 after 90 days, and annual performance based increases. It doesn't sound like alot, but an extra $20-30 a week went a long ways for a broke college student in the 1990's. I kept that job for 5 years, and everyone else I knew hopped around dozens of jobs for years. Replacement costs are high for employers, so retaining employees is advantageous.
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
Well that's exactly it. The people who play the race game are self loathing individuals who are not proud of what they are, hence why they are such miserable people. I would bet that most Americans would be like the people in this video, contrary to what the mainstream media tells us. There is a difference between pride and narcissism. You can be proud of being white, black, tall, short, Italian, Chinese, Norwegian, etc, without thinking that what you are is superior.
2
-
2
-
Not in all cases, but in many cases, "church" has just become a place to be seen. "I am holy and pious because I go to church every week, and I make sure everyone else sees me going there with my picture perfect family...yet the other 6 days of the week I cheat on my wife, beat my kids, and embezzle money from my employer.". Again, this is certainly not universal, but I have found that being active in a congregation is a perfect place for bad people to hide and pretend they are good. Yes, there truly are many good people there as well, but the whole thing is a turn off for me. I went almost ever week with my parents until I was about 16-17. Then as I got older I realized how much for show and for socializing and gossip it really was, so I quit going. You can be a faithful believer without belonging to any particular congregation or denomination. I am, and I haven't set foot in church in probably about 20 years.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The explanation for millennials supporting communism is actually quite simple. It's the education system. It has been overrun with radical instructors. There have always been some around, but there are more than ever now. Social media hasn't helped either. It gives radical individuals a platform to influence others, and as we all know, many of the younger generation are addicted to it. I am just old enough to have missed this as a late generation Xer. It was starting to creep into our society back in the 1990s, but we were still more or less taught the evils of communism still at that time. This has really come about in the last 20 or less years. I am also just old enough that I clearly remember the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc regimes in the early 90's. They do not because they were small children or not even born yet. These people have been brought up in a world where they have continually told the system is unfair, and grew up being sheltered and given participation trophies for everything. While I agree not everything is fair in life, I still believe that hard work and persistence pays off. But what is really different in terms of viewpoint is the definition of fair. Fair is opportunity, not necessarily results. Having the opportunity to succeed is true fairness, even if it is a difficult process. To me, it is the epitome of unfair to equally compensate everyone regardless of their efforts and skills. Some people work harder than others, and some have more skills than others, and for the most part, a free market economy rewards that. Being equally compensated for simply existing in class comparison to someone with a higher skill set and better work ethic, as in communism, is unfair. The only way some will learn is to gain success and have it taken away in the name of "fairness". It needs to hit them personally.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Way to set up a nice strawman. Maybe to some, the concept of God is a nice "catch-all" to explain everything away, but generalizing all who believe in a higher power as such simpletons is clearly just a strawman argument you propose to sound witty and clever, which I'm afraid accomplishes neither.
The origins of the universe and the existence of an intelligent designer are really just a proverbial chicken and egg dilemma. It comes down to one simple question...is the universe infinitely old and will exist on through infinity, or does it have a beginning and an end? Well, science has theorized it does have a beginning, and an end. So the beginning is what we are concerned with here, and there are really only 3 possible explanations. It spontaneously came out of nothing, it budded off of another older universe in the multiverse, or, it was created by some higher intelligence outside the scope of this universe. So, ask a scientist which one it was, and the answer you will get is that nobody knows. So believing that the third option was the right one makes one no more stupid than believing either of the other two possibilities, because none have been proven.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Well, many fundamentalists still do not believe in things like the big bang theory, evolution, etc, and believe the earth is 6,000 years old and every excerpt from the Bible is meant to be taken literally. But of course not everyone who believes in a higher power thinks that way. But yet of course such dogma does make it difficult to take organized religion seriously. That's kind of where I find myself. I believe in God, and I also believe in the science, which I think is possible. In my opinion, a defined beginning to the universe implies intelligent design (of course does not prove it, but implies it), whereas, like the narrator here said, an infinitely old universe would imply otherwise. This, and the fact that abiogenic conception is yet to be discovered anywhere points me again towards intelligent design. So am I religious? No. While I have no problem with organized religion existing and people practicing it, I just don't care to participate. But I believe in God, and more or less one of Christian origins...not so much that I take the Bible literally because I don't, but in that the lessons it teaches and rules it gives to be a good and pious person in the eyes of God is pretty sound, even if sensationalized by ancient humans. So I don't know what that makes me. Somewhere in between a Christian and an agnostic I guess.
2
-
@123mneil Yeah I read some other comments you made on some of the other threads and could see you had a similar way of thinking to mine on the matter, so I wanted to respond to your thread. What you say about church and religion in general is about where I am. I always say "I didn't leave the church, the church left me". And yes, I agree 100% that the Bible was never meant to be taken literally or scientifically, to me I view it as more of a moral guide (in some regards), and more of a window on how ancient people saw the world. It is interesting in that regard, and you can't really argue against teachings to be kind and honest and such...if God does indeed exist you would have to think that is what he would want from us.
But yeah, the ritualistic stuff turned me off, as well as the people who "went to church so they could be seen at church", which sadly I felt was most. I feel much more comfortable having my own personal beliefs, which as I said are rooted very much in Christianity but are not fundamentalist, and are not necessarily following some stringent set of rules that some text or some man says I should follow. I think just living a good and honest life is what is important, and if one does believe in God or any higher power, then their personal relationship with them is what really matters, not what some group says. I believe because I think it is rational to think the universe came from something rather than nothing, and because there is so much complexity and harmony among matter down to the molecular level that it is hard for me to accept it is all just random.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The sad truth is there are few real liberals remaining anywhere in the West anymore. And when I say liberal, I mean those who value liberty and freedom and personal responsibility, what today is often called libertarian, but isn't exactly libertarian, but rather more of a Jeffersonian, which is what I am. What we have today, mostly, is two competing factions of near-communist leftist, anti free speech, anti free thought radicals, versus the neocon, pro-war, pro-big business crushing the little guy, bible-thumping, teetotaling right. Common sense individualist, I'll leave you alone if you leave me alone, cherishers of liberty at all costs even if you disagree with opponents, is all but dead. So many things to blame, but we have hit such a downward spiral, and so many are so immersed in groupthink and defending "their side" at all costs that taking any other stance outside of an extreme in either direction gets you hated by all. You are too right for the left and too left for the right
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Agreed, in no way is the existence of God proven...so scientifically you cannot say as such, however religion works on belief and not proof. But it also goes beyond religion, I myself am not religious, yet I do believe in a higher power just because it seems rational to me. Of course others may find that irrational, and that is fine, everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. I am also fascinated by astrophysics and read much on the subject, and have no reason not to believe in many of the scientific theories associated with the studies.
But how then can I believe in God? Well, this may sound weird, but I think of it this way. Yes, no man has seen, touched, or proven that God exists. But at the same time no man, nor no probe even has seen, touched, or proven the existence of anything much beyond about Pluto, yet any rational person believes there is a whole universe beyond. Yet at the same time, how do we not know that we aren't living in a giant Truman show, where out around the Kuiper belt, the probes will crash into a giant holographic screen that keeps all of us living in some sort of simulation thinking we are real? We don't know. God, or any "intelligent designer", would be every bit as mysterious to our small minds as trying to prove the origins of the universe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
You can fancy whatever you like, men, women, both, neither, blow up dolls, sheep, whatever, but that doesn't make you physically something different than what you are. You are a man or a woman, or maybe in extremely rare cases, a hermaphrodite, but what you fancy sexually or feel like inside doesn't change that absolute fact of nature. These people are willingly delusional.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1