Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "David Pakman Explains the Problem with Medicare for All | Joe Rogan" video.

@MEOIT83 They also have a smaller budget to work with. The U.S. has a huge GDP per capita compared to Canada's (about $15,000 difference). There is no excuse, sorry. Even Russia can cover all of its citizens and its by no means homogenous (like the classic alt right examples of Japan and Norway lel).
74
@dominictumulty1531 I don't think I've ever seen more naivete in a single comment. Do financial restrictions mean nothing to you? The quality of food you eat, family situation, external life events, initial circumstances, all have a strong effect on whether or not you will succeed. You didn't have a good answer to what he said so you spouted bs platitudes about the all-too-familiar "pull yourself up by your own bootstraps!" idea. "Just don't get that degree" is complete garbage. Somebody has to get that degree! You're all too willing to preach to engineers and software developers that they "should've just gone into a trade" but you still need security updates to your computer. Your phone needs to be updated to the latest version. Chefs and servers get a lot of shit for 'not making the right choices' but the entire restaurant industry would die if not for their hard work-- for little pay, no less. You don't get to complain about the things you directly benefit from. If everyone followed your advice (and picked the safest, highest paying career), we'd all be screwed.
12
@ka0t1k1 Nice job dodging the issue. Why won't you address the fact that your money isn't that which you've earned on your own, but taken from the work of others? If you want to be Ayn Rand's wet dream, then stop using roads, electricity, and water. Why are you mooching off of others to take care of your needs? Dig your own well, build your own drive to work, power your own home, stop being useless.
7
@ka0t1k1 Someday, you'll be useless too. What will you do then?
6
@ka0t1k1 Making 7 figures and rising. I can say things on the internet, too! Even if that's true, it doesn't solve the larger problem. Not everyone will be a millionaire (don't fight statistics here), and they will eventually need medical care. Bear in mind those useless people you're referring to earned your million, not you. Unless you're willing to posit that Jeff Bezos is working at least ~1,400 times harder than you.
6
@ka0t1k1 Lol, everyone's gonna be a millionaire. Oh, but you'll actually do it! Because.. you're you, of course! You're the protagonist, and as long as you work hard things will work out! Like Disney told you!
5
Debunked? Lol. Race isn't a thing. IQ isn't a thing. You can take tutoring classes to raise your IQ. If it's inherent and based in biology, why can you raise it??? Also, race isn't a thing. Middle Easterners and Japanese were white, until they weren't. Define race, please. And define IQ. If they're real things, explain how they're objective. I'm waiting.
4
@nativedaughter9723 Um, could you elaborate? Virtually everything in the U.S. is more expensive, at the same quality, than in Canada. Unless you need some cutting-edge treatment, you're better off not going bankrupt for sitting in an American ER waiting room.
3
@orion00 Better than the alternative. Without a fire under their ass, it seems governments will waste either way. So why not at least have a system that covers everyone?
3
What's wrong? We're fucking humans. Some archaic sense of justice like "I help me and mine, go fuck yourself" is just a bad way to do things. You get some emotional satisfaction knowing that low-life got what he deserved! But don't realize it's costing you more than if you'd just help him.
2
@ka0t1k1 Also, bad troll
2
Lol, Joe the infallible, scholarly source.. What you said is measurably false. It's America with the problem. American healtthcare is only world-class... at the very top!! For average people, the vast majority of people actually using the services, it's often identical (usually worse) to European or Canadian healthcare. Except, you have to pay out of pocket for every visit and the drug companies can charge whatever they want. Land of the Fee! https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-releases/2019/us-health-care-spending-highest-among-developed-countries.html
1
Sure, because they all stand to make more than they would under Medicare for all. Higher medical supply costs get passed along to consumers, hospitals and doctors take a cut because no one's looking, or counting. Also, which school??
1
@bobsmith-ru4lf In which ways?
1
@bobsmith-ru4lf If you want to spread the 'burden' evenly, just bring it up. It's not like any nation can really ignore you. You'd lose your martyrdom card, so pick wisely. I sincerely hope you don't think anyone should kowtow to you for doing something we can (and should) all do together.
1
@wyattlong8321 So, no answer? If a white person can breed with a black person, then they're not different races. Biologically, we're all part of the human race. We're all the same species. Sorry bud.
1
@wyattlong8321 Right, but "it's in the dictionary" doesn't mean "it has a measurable basis in biology". If race has a concrete, scientific definition, I'd love to hear. But as far as I'm concerned, race is something we made up. Why are Hungarians and Austrians both called white? Hungarians are Magyar, they come from Central Asia. What about Spaniards? Or Sicilians? Their skin isn't even white! Are Jews white? Middle Eastern? Are Arabs white? Asian? Are Arabs and Chinese the same because they're both Asian? Race is a load of bullshit. It's not specific, quantifiable, or proven. Too bad
1
@rainman11985 Right, that changes nothing. We're all the same species, and can breed. And again, sub-species is determined by a taxonomist; it's not quantifiable. Different species can be differentiated by not being able to breed. Sub-species are something we decide on. Which brings me back to my question: what is the biological basis for race? Are Indians a "sub-species"? What about Pakistanis? Are they the same as Indians? Are Arabs and Chinese the same because they're both Asian? Are Greeks and Jews white? The terms we use (white, black, Asian) aren't biologically meaningful, so saying that "black people are dumb" doesn't mean anything. West Africans? East Africans? Egyptians? Who are you talking about here? And why can you raise your IQ score, if it's supposed to be a measure of unchanging biological intelligence??
1
@orion00 No, I'm not. Did you even read my comment?
1
Yes, depending on the situation. Ex: Conservatives love to rail on San Francisco and its homeless problem, but don't ever stop to think about why. There's a housing shortage, so why not just build more houses? California's standards are higher than the rest of the U.S., but its economy is enormous, so it can afford it. Why doesn't it? Because older liberals and conservatives don't want any new buildings in their neighborhood. It would destroy the "character"— but the bums on the streets doesn't? Idk. Anyway, it's the conservative idea of "not in my backyard!" that's halting development. We could build beautiful high rises or mixed use neighborhoods, but no one wants to take one for the team. So yes is my answer. If people weren't such dicks, we'd make progress from the top down.
1
@youngKOkid1 Not really. The zoning laws are somewhat liberal— haha!— in California. Especially in San Fran and the Bay Area in general. And the "only residential, keep everything separate" was a conservative one to begin with. Conservatives love the idea of a plot of land, all to one's self, no Communist housing blocs etc. Mixed use is the way forward, but (usually older) people don't want "those damn kids" ruining their unsustainable paradise. Also, the laws are enforced by the same people who refuse to allow development near them. Multiple proposals have been out forward only to be shot down by constituents in town halls. The laws are there, but the government can't just come in and bulldoze existing residents. Democrats are absolutely to blame here (it's California, come on) but the idea itself fits nicely into the "white picket fence" worldview.
1
Holy shit I'm sorry, I misread a word and thought you meant the opposite of what you said, my bad
1
That's true! But that's also more of an America-exclusive problem. If we didn't have one half of the population constantly trying to strip the Feds dry, maybe they'd actually do well. Remember how FDR took over and jump-started the economy after the Depression? And then gave soldiers government handouts for moving out of the cities? Which led to the 1950's? We could achieve that again.
1
@wyattlong8321 That's simply not true. Conservatives like to "debunk the myth" that FDR helped the economy, by citing the dip or Recession of 1937. Unemployment spiked from 14.3% to 19%. What they forget to mention, is that FDR inherited an America with 24.9% unemployment. Even ignoring the fact that government spending— which was central to the New Deal— propelled the U.S. economy by 1941, thanks to the war, FDR brought unemployment down by 6%, at his worst. That, in a single term, is incredible. I know you don't like admitting it, but he did restore the American economy. America experienced an economic boom under him. If a fiscally conservative President were elected, Keynesian economics wouldn't have rebuilt Europe, or made America into a superpower.
1
@wyattlong8321 Yes, it did. We still rely on the idea today, unless you want to tell me that Trump (and Obama, and Clinton, and Reagan, etc) actually reduced the budget ceiling? Or have you forgotten the word 'deficit'? Our "greatest period of growth" is a subjective term. GDP was fully fleshed out in the 1930's, so we can't exactly measure "growth" in conventional terms before then. If you have a metric you're using, let me hear it. That being said, I agree that America expanded massively during that century, but remember this: -Lewis and Clark were sent out by the Government to chart for them. -Most "Wild West" towns were sponsored by the Government. Their creation was to increase their Treasury size. -The 1800's were primarily marked by the creation of the Transcontinental Railroad and the Erie Canal. both Gov't projects. -When there was 'no regulation whatsoever,' a few robber barons were extremely wealthy, and the rest of America was dirt -poor. Remember tenements? Slums? Political machines? It wasn't called the Gilded Age for nothing. Without regulation, cities were filthy cesspools. People died of starvation, and worked for pennies. -The Interstate Highway System was (obviously) Government funded and built. We wouldn't be anywhere near where we are today, without it. About the rest of your comment: if it was geography, then economics had nothing to do with it either way, why mention it? And yes, it did. What the fuck do you think the Marshall Plan was? A not- government funded handout to stimulate Europe? Do you think the "Free Market" just "swooped in" and made everything better? The Government spent trillions to help rebuild. I know no one paid the 90% (btw) rate. The effective rate was still much higher than what we're paying for today.
1
@captainvoluntaryistthestat3207 Have you ever actually been? Or is that just coming out of your ass (or a /pol/ post— same thing, really. Very thorough analysis)
1