John Stossel - Why I Did It

[sethisawesome]

We watched Stossel in high school several times. What he taught me I've remembered to this day, but what the teachers taught me... not so much.

[tepeyac10]

Hes no different than all the brain washed north koreans weeping over the death of their dictator

[tepeyac10]

He's such a tool

[theAbeElement]

the average income in canada is 19.2 thousand per year?! wowa, I am from there, that's verrry low

[LibertyDownUnder]

Just 1 correction. New Zealand is a Socialist hell hole, and is not a good example of free markets.

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder New Zealand ranked third on Cato's list of economic freedom. The U.S. ranked sixth.

[LibertyDownUnder]

@JohnJ2427, possibly, but people mindset over there is still very collective. They have a strong socialist movement and have had high unemployment for a very long time.

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder Their unemployment rate is 6.5 percent. Are you sure you're thinking of the right country?

[LibertyDownUnder]

@JohnJ2427, it's not counting all their people on disability pensions, people looking for more work, people who have given up looking etc.

With those it's way over 10%

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder They count it the same way America does. If America included all those people, our unemployment rate would be over 15%, and probably close to 20%.

[LibertyDownUnder]

@JohnJ2427, America has a sick ecenomy, and isn't really a good benchmark.

I'm just saying that NZ isn't a great example of free markets. Tens of thousands of Kiwis of all ages have been leaving the country, preferring to work in Australia and even the UK.

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder Have you seen the UK lately? The UK's unemployment rate is higher than New Zealand's, unless you count the rioters as employed. Australia's is 5.6%, but that's only a little better. New Zealand is hardly a "socialist hellhole". Perhaps you were thinking of Cuba or North Korea.

[LibertyDownUnder]

@JohnJ2427, perhaps the word "hellhole" is a bit harsh. But have a read of the wikipedia entry for "socialism in New Zealand". It ain't pretty.

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder Socialism anywhere isn't pretty. Socialism in Australia isn't pretty. Socialism in China is really, really, really, not pretty.

[DrCruel]

@JohnJ2427 Actually it's rather fantastic if you're part of the small Maoist aristocracy. It's only the vast majority of the Chinese public (and quite a few ethnic minorities) that suffers from the dictatorial, hypocritical socialist regime of thugs based in Beijing.

[JohnJ2427]

@LibertyDownUnder Have you seen the UK lately? The UK's unemployment rate is higher than New Zealand's, unless you count the rioters as employed. Australia's is 5.6%, but that's only a little better. New Zealand is hardly a "socialist hellhole". Perhaps you were thinking of Cuba or North Korea.

[alsdaftable]

where the hell did he get his figures from? It seems to me he pulled them out of his ass



[ned262626]

@ninjashade411 i was being sarcastic. what i really meant was that you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. the church made great sacrifices with its time and money just so you could go to private schools. when you criticize it or appear to be ungrateful it tells me that you were just using it.

[ned262626]

@ninjashade411 im sorry you had to go to private schools instead of the public school system as it seems that you would have been happier there.

[ned262626]

cheap catholic schools educate children

expensive public schools fail

[contender60]

John , this was the only place where my comments on the Hollins program would be printed these comments are blocked at the Hollins u tube postings. We would like you to admit ,even thoughtyou had problems with stuttering and went thru the Hollins program, that your stuttering problem was mild as compared to the majority of people who go to Hollins. Since you reveal the truth about many different topics over the years, why not reveal this truth about stuttering an Hollins.

[willzyx1980]

@contender60 Who are you, what the hell are you talking about, and why don't you learn to write properly?

[k2411871]

looks like a peado

[rubbersole79]

"From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"

Karl Marx

[mpc91]

@rubbersole79 - wouldn't it be cool if that worked. It completely ignores the idea that people do things for a reason. Socialism and Communism are based in fantasy that sounds nice and fools otherwise good people into giving up their rights to government.

[rubbersole79]

@mpc91

"Those who are willing to give up essential liberties for temporary safety, deserve neither"

Benjamin Franklin

[rubbersole79]

@mpc91

Exactly.....

[captwasabi]

@rubbersole79 Unfortunately that simply does not work. If a person is only going to get what they need then, for the most part, they will only work to that level. What you quoted pretty much kills drive and ambition. Why should I work harder than I can possibly be renumerated for?

[rubbersole79]

@captwasabi

Exactly.....it was totally intended as sarcasm

[captwasabi]

@rubbersole79 Ok. Unfortunately sarcasm does not translate well in type. Duly noted.

[ProudConservative2]

@captwasabi Exactly correct and the simple explanation at to why Capitalism works better than any other system (if everyone has an opportunity to engage in it). If someone can stay home and collect an unemployment check, they sure won't go out an work for the same, less or even more money. They would if the govt check wasn't there!

[georgel19841]

Liberty to do anything,and some of the people will do use full things,not liberty to all

but liberty for some will ensure prosperity. Can anyone say that America is rich ,because India is poor.The answer is Yes,because capitalism produce an constant

procentage of poor 95% and rich5%,just that know ,those poor don't live in America,but India.

[mpc91]

@georgel19841 - WRONG. Capitalism and the free market have not created a poor India, strict government controls on the free market and capitalism have created a poor India. Ask yourself why Hong Kong and Singapore are wealthy, but China is poor? Government is needed to protect a secure environment for the free market, it does not need to control it, because doing so limits opportunities, and that is what keeps people poor.

[enomarekim]

we shouldn't give money to anyone. giving subsidies to companies is bull shit corporatism, thats what allows monopolies to thrive. Corporate welfare is no better than social welfare.

[sandroeleven]

Wonder what Stossel means by taken care of....the gov't of Haiti doesnt take care of their people. But in many european countries, you are taken care of. One can interpret a comment so many different ways.

[baltjones]

@sandroeleven Not sure of the exact spot you mean, but I think he's basically advocating private property and freedom from regulation (and so "democracy" without those won't necessarily do any good). Small businesses can then start up and grow, etc.

[larsiemannen]

You'll never see 'free countries' needs any help through Forreign aid or similar. like haiti. many tens of thousands died of an earthquake similar one to san fransisco, and in SF there died on 80. its so lol. Someone deserves to burn in hell. I'll put a card on socialists.

[sandroeleven]

"You'll never see 'free countries' needs any help through Forreign aid or similar. like haiti. many tens of thousands died of an earthquake similar one to san fransisco, and in SF there died on 80"

Diff countries, diff space, diff scale...

[natdavi]

unless you need a dentist lol!

[sniper6081]

He didn't say that. He said the countries with the most central planning, which includes Haiti.

[jgposner]

You say lost, but is it really. It goes to paying salaries. The thing is, we can be wasteful because technology has made it possible. We don't need half our workforce. Since the 1946 Employment Act, the it has been the government's job to maintain employment. I get frustrated with government waste but not for the same reasons. I hate government jobs because it wastes our resources, our leisure time, and it tears apart families. Does this make sense?

[rrp1973]

Why complain about payng in tax what you give in charity?

-The principal, force vs voluntary

-The efficiency - how much of the dollar sent to washington do you think ends up helping your disabled neighbor

[undermyvoodoo22]

@rrp1973 exactly, efficiency is the number 1 concern.

[al123420]

Stossel is part tv-reporter, part politician, and part porn-star... I mean check the stache!

[BloodiCheeseCake]

John Stossel rules.

[mccarrpo]

John Stossel 4 President!!!

We love you John.

[jwka2001]

tight video,, love john stossel he is my homeboy hehehe

[LouigiVerona]

Today USA I believe is loosing its freedom. There are too much rules now, really. Especially in the informational field, namely - copyright.

[luckyvet]

John is equivilant to the Ron Paul of journalism.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Just as Ron Paul is irrelevant in American politics (check his 2008 Republican primary number), so Stossel is now irrelevant as a shill for laissez-faire economics and deregulation. Keep talking, Stossel, in this recession no one is listening!

[luckyvet]

Can't hear you, stop making sheep noises.

[lives2live]

lol luckyvet,

 so true

[augustus0963]

The last statement was the most insightful-

Every year government gets bigger and the press cheers it on.

[timbosforporn]

Those 20% come back and tell us how bad it is. I here the the stories and it makes me not want to travel.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Typical ignorant, exceptionalist American attitude. Incidentally, learn how to spell in your own language - you're an embarrassment to your own country.

[kdawg860]

maybe 20% of americans own a passport because a lot of people want to stay in the country and travel within the country. it is fairly huge. the eu is large and consists of much smaller countries. ever thought of that? watch the whole 40 minute documentary. and try to keep an open mind. then let me know what you think. the user "payeco" has the whole video, there's a link to the right under related videos.

[francoamerican99]

You're being an asshole. And yes, i own TWO Passports

[goose1077]

only one is valid

[goose1077]

Americans are aware, that any time they leave the country, they leave behind the protection of the U.S. constitution. Have you ever seen Broke Down Palace? We also leave behind a health care system that, although way to expensive, works. Leaving America is seen as risky by many Americans.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

First of all, most Americans *can't* leave their country, since most (75% to be exact) are too lazy to obtain a passport. In addition, many rely on fictional films (such as Broke Down Palace) as their source of information about foreign countries, thereby perpetuating the outdated "USA #1" myth. Currently, the US economy has the highest unemployment rate in 25 years. With this in mind, I suggest you ask those who are currently without a job if the American healthcare system "works" for them.

[goose1077]

I wonder what percentage of Europeans go places other than Europe.

[UKRentor1605]

Honestly? Quite alot. I used to live in england and almost everyone who could afford it has either been to either Australia or South Africa. I had some french friends who vacationed in in Morocco. I went on vacation to Cyprus personally, and besides all that, there is quite alot of travel between different countries on a regular basis. Europeans seem to be quite a bit more aware than Americans do. Note, i'm An american citizen by birth and by choice, but Europe is right atm.

[uktransplantedyank]

It's not as risky as a lot of people believe.

I've lived in the UK for 5 years, and I can tell you the National Health Service has never done me wrong.

[FranklyMisterShankly]

Did Stossel make this in the 80s, when his Geraldo moustache was still in fashion? Re: 4:48 -Stossel thinks laissez-faire economics is the answer to *every* problem. "Americans ranked themselved ahead of every other country" -only 20% of Americans even own a passport. Ignorance is such bliss! In the USSR people were routinely told they live "in the best country in the world" without seeing how the rest of the world lives. Note that Stossel doesn't bother to make a comparison with any EU country.

[Coowallsky]

Was there a point in there somewhere?

[uktransplantedyank]

"Note that Stossel doesn't bother to make a comparison with any EU country."

He'd be on far shakier ground if he did. There aren't any places without running water in the UK, for example, that I'm aware of.

[JohnJ2427]

Daily Mail: "Thousands of women are having to give birth outside maternity wards because of a lack of midwives and hospital beds.

The lives of mothers and babies are being put at risk as births in locations ranging from lifts to toilets - even a caravan - went up 15 per cent last year to almost 4,000."

[uktransplantedyank]

Show me the article, then, if that really IS from the Daily Mail. Otherwise, I call pure bollocks.

[JohnJ2427]

The logical fallacy you introduce is commonly referred to as confusing the parts with the whole. In this particular instance, you wrongly assume that your personal experience must be representative of everyone's experience with NHS. While it must be true that the NHS helps some people sometimes, the question of what system is more efficient cannot be settled by personal anecdotes, but only by comparing the systems as a whole.

[uktransplantedyank]

And the system of the NHS as a whole works well, even if problems (mostly caused by New Labour's bungling in recent times) such as the one expressed by the Daily Mail article exist. I could find you similar horror stories that happen to people in the US health care system and you'd likely say that those problems aren't representative of the whole.

[JohnJ2427]

I'm more than happy to put up a free-market system against anything less. And I'm perfectly happy to discuss reforms that will actually make things better, because the American system could stand a lot of improvement. However, the plain fact of the matter is that illness survival rates and treatment times in America are far better than most other countries, including Britian's. I'm perfectly capable of comparing statistics, if you want to discuss the issue.

[JohnJ2427]

telegraph co uk:

'Cruel and neglectful' care of one million NHS patients exposed

One million NHS patients have been the victims of appalling care in hospitals across Britain, according to a major report released today.

(Any system that takes from Peter and gives to uktransplantedyank can always count on the support of uktransplantedyank. It's always more fun to be the recipient of free stuff than to be forced to be the giver.)

[uktransplantedyank]

(I actually pay taxes into the same system I benefit from, so keep your assumptions to yourself.)

[JohnJ2427]

If you think the system can be supported by those who are willing to pay for it, why not let people choose whether or not to pay for it? Your entire ideology is based on forcing people to pay for something you want.

[uktransplantedyank]

The people chose to pay for it in 1948 when the National Health Service was created here. The UK came out of World War II worse for the wear, and many were without homes due to all the bombing. Not only did the government set to work building decent pre-fabricated homes for people, but they also set to work creating a government-funded health care service that the people desperately wanted. Even to this day it works better than a profit-driven system.

[JohnJ2427]

"The people" chose no such thing. If "the people" had chosen to pay for it, they would do so voluntarily. Instead, a law was passed making "the people" pay for it whether they wanted to or not. Your rationalizations are pathetic attempts to justify forcing someone else to pay for your life.

[uktransplantedyank]

The people DID choose to pay for it. THEY were the ones without homes and in need of medical care. THEY asked for a National Health Service, and so they got one - courtesy of one gobby Welsman named Nye Bevan. Go look him up.

YOUR rationalizations are just a pathetic attempt to reject any perspective other than an American one on the issue. Some nations' inhabitants actually don't mind paying higher taxes for socialized medicine.

[JohnJ2427]

Bullshit. They chose to make someone else pay for their homes. if they'd chosen to pay for their homes themselves, they would not have passed a law forcing other people to pay for it.

Deep in your heart, you know that it's wrong to throw someone in jail if they don't give you their money. It doesn't matter if 1 person forces 99 to give him money, or if 51 force 49 to give them money. It never becomes right to threaten to punish someone if they don't give you their money.

[uktransplantedyank]

It's not bullshit at all. These same people were otherwise hard-working people whose homes had been BOMBED - I repeat - BOMBED continuously throughout World War II. Why shouldn't they have received any help? They were fellow Britons who just came out of a devastating war!

Deep in your heart, you know it's wrong to force people to pay thousands of dollars for simple medical visits. Insurance companies aren't there to help out, they're there for a profit. That's the difference.

[JohnJ2427]

They could have asked. Instead, they chose to threaten people with jail. I give lots of money to charities of my choosing. No one is forced to pay thousands of dollars for simple medical procedures, There are plenty of charities and doctors who voluntarily contribute. And if someone doesn't want to help me, I know that I don't have the right to force them to help me. That's the difference. In your mind, everyone is your slave.

[JohnJ2427]

If they don't mind, then you don't need a law, do you? Try letting them actually choose whether or not to give their money to ungrateful leeches like you. I bet you'll find them not so willing after all. You know it, too. That's why you continue to justify your petty theft with ridiculous rationalizations.

You know they don't want to give you their money. They only do it because you threaten to throw them in jail if they don't.

Try paying your own way sometime.

[uktransplantedyank]

Um, I do pay my own way. It's called T-A-X-E-S. Your ridiculous sophistry that you use to justify a profit-driven medical system just doesn't work.

[JohnJ2427]

You don't pay your own way. You pay a little in taxes and get the rest given to you by others' taxes. You're the one profiting at other people's expense.

[uktransplantedyank]

"If they don't mind, then you don't need a law, do you? Try letting them actually choose whether or not to give their money to ungrateful leeches like you."

Let me say this again, only this time much slower:

I. Pay. Taxes. Just. Like. Anyone. Else.

Here's another one I'm going to say much slower:

The. People. Already. Chose. The. National. Health. Service. A. Long. Time. Ago.

Seriously, just because I'm not an anti-social greed-head like you doesn't mean I'm a "leech."

[JohnJ2427]

You're the greedy one because you think it's okay to take a hundred just because you pay a dollar. You're the one forcing other people to pay for your lifestyle. You can try to blame the people who want to contribute voluntarily instead of by force, but you know the difference.

Here's a challenge for you: keep track of every dollar you pay in taxes, and every dollar the government spends on you in taxes, including police, utilities, and every other benefit. See who's really greedy.

[uktransplantedyank]

OK, can we have a few less of the emotive right-wing blanket statements? Care to actually debate the issue without throwing up your amerocentric bias?

[JohnJ2427]

I haven't said a thing about America. You're projecting. I've given cold, hard logic, and you just can't deal with it. if you really believe that you pay your way, then stop forcing other people to pay your way. It's that simple.

[uktransplantedyank]

You haven't given "cold, hard logic." You've only given the typical right-wing blanket statements that basically amount to, "I want to keep my money and I don't care about anyone else."

[JohnJ2427]

Bullshit. I've talked about contributing voluntarily versus being forced to work for others. You're projecting your greed again.

[uktransplantedyank]

I'm not projecting anything, actually. You've only used the sophistical "being forced to work for others" argument because you can't bear to part with a single extra cent in taxes. You really only want to keep your money and damn everyone else in America and how they're doing. It shows.

[JohnJ2427]

Bullshit. I give to charities. I gave nearly a thousand to Mercy Corp. last year. I give to LUNGevity, and Direct Relief International, and the National Cancer Coalition, and others. I'm absolutely positive I give more to charity than you do, because your ideology is based on making sure you get enough from everybody else. My ideology is the one based on giving.

[uktransplantedyank]

"Bullshit. I give to charities."

Then what's your problem with giving that same money in taxes to people who desperately need medical care but can't afford it under the current punitive corporate medical climate?

"I'm absolutely positive I give more to charity than you do, because your ideology is based on making sure you get enough from everybody else."

You have no clue about my ideology actually. It's actually "everyone pays into it and everyone should benefit." You work that one out.

[JohnJ2427]

Because charities work better to give people what they need. Government welfare is how politicians convince people to let them buy the votes of the poor. For one, I don't want a politician taking credit for the money I give. S/he gets to look like a hero while I've done nothing. If you really cared, you'd have checked.

For another, I don't want to support people who think they have a right to throw me in jail if I don't give them money. I want to help those who want to help themselves.

[JohnJ2427]

For a third reason, I don't believe that I have the right to force someone else to give to the charities I like. Instead, I make money so that I can give more to the charities that actually benefit people, instead of letting politicians take my money and give it to the charities they like.

[JohnJ2427]

Another excellent investigation into government versus charity: watch?v=vuL8teeuJD8

Of course, if you really cared, you would have read a couple of books about government and law. Maybe Aristotle's Politics, or possibly Locke's Two Treatises on Government. If you really cared, you'd want to know what actually works better. And it's so easy in today's world to learn. But you're more interested in making sure that other people are paying your way than in knowing and supporting what works.

[uktransplantedyank]

I know what works better, through direct comparative experience. You might want to come live in Britain for a while so YOU can know what works. Then again, that'd require too much effort to step outside your Amerocentric comfort zone.

Nevermind, after this post I just can't be bothered with you anymore.

[JohnJ2427]

After two weeks? Whatevs.

Taxes aren't charity. People will contribute more, and more happily, when they're not being threatened for not giving enough.

The problem with being entitled to have other people pay for your existence is that eventually other people's money runs out.

[uktransplantedyank]

Again, other people don't pay for my existence. I work and pay taxes like anyone else. That won't ever sink into your thick skull, though, so it's pointless to debate with you. You're a rabid right-wing neocon true believer. Good luck with that.

[JohnJ2427]

As I've noted countless times, paying taxes does not give you the right to force other people to give you their money. "I paid a dollar in taxes, so I have a right to a thousand dollars of other people's taxes." Any system that steals from Peter to give to Paul can always count on the support of Paul. Even if the system takes something from everyone (and it doesn't), it doesn't give back equally to everyone, and it relies on those who pay in more than they get back for its sustainability.

[JohnJ2427]

If you want to call me a "rabid right-wing neocon" because I agree with Thomas Jefferson that individual freedom goes hand-in-hand with individual responsibility, fine. Your faith in an government-run ponzi scheme betrays your economic ignorance. When you finally run out of other people's money to sustain your existence, maybe you'll change your mind.

[HandyMan101]

@JohnJ2427 THUMBS UP sir..  thumbs up

[uqutaq]

@JohnJ2427 beautifuly said

[JohnJ2427]

Here's an investigation into the ideology of charity versus the ideology of government: watch?v=9tQYP6K0ZdU

[JohnJ2427]

Your rationalizations are pathetic. Just because a majority supports stealing from the few makes it moral? You know better. You know your life would suck without other people paying your way. You know you enjoy leeching off your society's best and brightest. And you know that if they had a choice, they wouldn't support you anymore.

[uktransplantedyank]

YOUR rationalizations are pathetic, not mine. You keep leaning on these emotive right-wing statements such as "paying taxes for health care is stealing, ZOMG," but you're not really getting at the heart of the health care matter. Society's "best and brightest," as you call them, get away with murder under US law as it is, with all their tax loopholes and what-not. If they can afford to pay a little extra in taxes, why shouldn't they? It's not as though they'll be put in the poor house.

[JohnJ2427]

Forcing other people to pay for something you want is stealing. Your ingratitude toward the few who do support the system is evidence that you really think you deserve to have other people pay your way.